An Ethiopian Asks about Isaiah 53
8: 26-40

34 AD

An Ethiopian asks about Isaiah 53 DIG: Why does the eunuch visit Jerusalem? The eunuch was reading Isaiah 53. In what does Yeshua fit the picture of the One described there? If you were Philip using Isaiah 53, what would you emphasize about the gospel? How did God pave the way for his message? What is the relationship between divine preparation and human initiative in this account? What is the significance of this story for the Messianic Community being persecuted in Yerushalayim? So far, what has been the effect of Stephen’s death upon Philip? Upon the Messianic Community as a whole? What is the Isaiah Avenue?

REFLECT: For the way God sets up opportunities to witness (2:5-14, 3:6-16, 8:26-40), how does that free you from fears in evangelism? What do these stories show about the context in which evangelism is to happen? Deep down, do you think successful CEO’s really need the gospel as much as poor beggars (3:2)? Why or why not? Would you know the Bible well enough to speak to the eunuch’s questions? How can you grow in your faith so you will be prepared for surprise opportunities?

Philip figures in a second story, which is again concerned with the missionary expansion of the Church. The story is included here both because it is about Philip and because it forms part of the gradual, but inexorable progress in Acts from the Jewish beginnings of the Messianic community in Jerusalem to the Gentile growth of the Church to the end of the earth (1:8). Not only that, but this story also includes those who were excluded from the full rights of Judaism. The way in which the story is told bears some resemblance to another account in which a Stranger joined two travelers and opened up the Scriptures to them, took part in a sacramental act, and then suddenly disappeared from view (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Mh – On the Road to Emmaus).¹⁷⁷

After Peter and John had returned to Jerusalem (8:25), Philip received a new commission. The story is set in motion by an angelic command to Philip which took him away from the scene of successful evangelism (see Ba – Simon the Sorcerer), and led him to a place that didn’t seem that promising. Now an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, saying: Get up, and go south at noon (Greek: mesembrian because the sun lies directly south at noon) on the road going down from Jerusalem to Gaza. There were two roads from Jerusalem to Gaza, and the Spirit commanded Philip to take the one that was seldom used. So he got up and went. He did not struggle with the somewhat crazy notion to go down a hot, desert road at noon. Immediately obeying, however, he saw an Ethiopian eunuch – an official who was responsible for all the treasure of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians (8:26-27a). Ethiopia, south of Egypt, is the biblical Cush (Second Samuel 18:21-32; Jeremiah 46:9), its populace being identified with the sons of Ham, through his first son Cush. According to the Bible, King Solomon developed a widespread commercial network through Egypt and Cilicia to Sheva (southern Arabia) by way of the newly-constructed port of Ezion -Geber on the Red Sea (First Kings 9:26-28, 10:1-13). Josephus identified the Queen of Sheva as the Queen of Ethiopia (see the commentary on the Life of Solomon Bu – Solomon and the Queen of Sheva).¹⁷⁸ This remote, but advanced culture was the object of endless curiosity for the Greeks and Romans who considered it the end of the earth. In other words, the eunuch had traveled no small distance and was an official of no small kingdom.¹⁷⁹

The Ethiopian eunuch was a court official responsible for all the treasure of Candace: The word court official in Greek is dunastes and this is where we get the word dynasty. In Luke 1:52 it is used of rulers. In First Timothy 6:15 the same word is used of God. The fact that this word is used of him means that he had a very high and influential position in the government. In modern terms, he was the Minister of Finance in Ethiopia, one of the highest positions in their government. So his influence in Ethiopia would have been great.

Candace, queen of the Ethiopians: This was not a proper name, but like Cesar, Pharaoh and Abimelech, an official title. Because the Ethiopian Kingdom was a matriarchy, the king of Ethiopia was considered a child of the sun and therefore too sacred to perform any of the human functions of royalty. Therefore, the queen mother performed all of the royal duties and she always had the title of Candace, and the real power behind the throne.

He had traveled to Jerusalem to worship (Greek: proskuneo, meaning to kiss the face, or to worship) and was now returning (8:27b). He was concerned enough about his spiritual life that he traveled at least sixty days to Jerusalem to worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but his heart was still not satisfied. This Ethiopian represents many people today who are religious, read the Scriptures, and seek the truth, yet do not have saving faith in Yeshua Messiah. They are sincere, but they are sincerely lost. They need someone to show them the way.¹⁸⁰

He was sitting in his ox-drawn wagon, he was reading the prophet Isaiah out loud (8:28). This was and is a common practice in the Near East, even when they do it for their own instruction, without any intention of being overheard by others. They swing the head, and even the entire upper body, from side to side as they read, and utter words with a tone that comes nearer to singing than to our unimpassioned mode of reading.¹⁸¹ Apart from the Ruach’s orchestration of events, this meeting would have never taken place at all. Once again this emphasizes the sovereign work of the Ruach ha-Kodesh in salvation.

He was a eunuch: How he came into contact with Judaism is not told. The term eunuch normally indicates a person who has been castrated; such people were forbidden entry to the Temple according to the Torah of Moses (Deuteronomy 23:1). That meant that he could never be a full proselyte. There were three levels of Gentile relationship to Judaism.

The first level were God-fearers: These were Gentiles who became convinced that ADONAI was the only true God, they abandoned their paganism and idolatry, but they did not choose to become a proselyte in any form, and hence there was no adoption of Jewish customs or practices (see Be – The Centurion’s Vision). The second level were Proselytes at the Gate: The Gate was the middle wall of separation (Ephesians 2:14) in the Temple compound that Gentiles were not allowed to go beyond under penalty of death (see below).

This was a Gentile who adopted many Jewish practices like celebrating Shabbat and the feasts of Isra’el, but did not become a full proselyte. Most of these were men because this level didn’t require circumcision. And the third level were Proselytes of the Covenant: They entered the Covenant of Sinai as a full Jew, so to speak. Most of these were women because this level required circumcision.¹⁸²

So because the Ethiopian eunuch had been castrated, he did the best he could and became a Proselyte of the Gate. And that meant that he had adopted many of the practices of Judaism, in fact, he did everything a proselyte would have done except for circumcision. Despite his power and prestige, however, the Ethiopian had a vast emptiness in his soul. He had traveled to Yerushalayim to worship on the occasion of one of the three travel festivals of either Sukkot (Booths), Pesach (Passover), or Shavu’ot (Weeks), and was on his journey home, passing the time by reading from his Greek translation of the TaNaKh.¹⁸³ This was not a state visit, he came to worship ADONAI. He was hungry for God’s Word. It was this man that Philip was to meet on a lonely desert road. The eunuch is a classic example of the one who lived up to the light he had. Then God gave him the full revelation of Yeshua Messiah through Philip’s ministry.

In all the TaNaKh, Isaiah holds the greatest hope for the eunuch in his picture of God’s ideal future, a future that promises a monument in God’s house, a name better than sons and daughters, an everlasting name that will not be cut off (Isaiah 56:3-8). Little did the eunuch know that he was about to experience the fulfillment of those promises. And little did Philip know his own role in their fulfillment. Philip was probably still wondering why God had sent him to this lonely place, and perhaps he was a bit bemused by the strange spectacle of the ox-drawn wagon in front of him (plodding along at not much more than a walking pace), with its exotic passenger and his entourage following behind. Then suddenly, for the second time in the story, Philip received a divine command. Now, the Ruach ha-Kodesh said to Philip, “Go, and catch up with this wagon” (8:29).¹⁸⁴ The rabbis taught that when God speaks in heaven, “the daughter of His voice” the bat-kol, or an echo, is heard on earth. After the last of the prophets, it was considered that God provided the bat-kol to continue to give guidance to the people (Tractate Yoma 9b).

Although the eunuch’s entourage must have been impressive, Philip was not intimidated. Instantly complying with the voice of the bat-kol, Philip ran up to the slow-moving wagon and began to trot alongside. There, he heard the Ethiopian reading the prophet Isaiah. Because he was a man of position, he would have had a driver handling the ox-drawn wagon. Therefore, he would have had the time to read. Not only that, but by the providence of God, this man was reading from one of the key Messianic prophecies pointing to Yeshua (Isaiah 52:11 to 53:12). At that moment, Philip probably knew that ADONAI had given him an open door, a prepared heart.

When Philip heard the eunuch reading out loud it provided an opening and he said: Do you understand what you are reading (8:30)? Philip wasn’t asking if the eunuch understood the words he was reading. What he really wanted to know was, “Do you know who the passage is speaking about?” It was good for the Ethiopian to be reading Isaiah, but unless understanding was brought to him, there would be no benefit from his reading. The book of Acts has already referred to Yeshua four times as the Servant of God (3:13 and 26, 4:27 and 30). Modern Jewish interpretation understands this servant to be the people of Isra’el (see the commentary on Isaiah Iy – The Death of the Suffering Servant), not the Messiah.

Philip’s experience ought to encourage us in our own personal witness for the Lord. To begin with, ADONAI directed Philip to the right person at the right time. You and I are not likely to have an angel instruct us, but we can know the guidance of the Holy Spirit in our witnessing if we are walking in the Spirit and praying for God’s direction.¹⁸⁵

God had already prepared the man’s heart to receive Philip’s message. Then the Ethiopian responded, “How can I,” he said, “unless someone guides me?” He realized that he needed someone to interpret the passage. The evangelist’s heart must have been rejoicing in the confidence that YHVH had so prepared this eunuch. He had a seeking, humble and teachable spirit. But the passage was Isaiah 53:7b-8, and it puzzled the eunuch. So, he invited Philip to come up and sit with him (8:31). 

As the Minister of Finance in Ethiopia, he was more than likely able to speak Greek, the international language of the day. Now the passage of Scripture that he was reading from the Septuagint (LXX) was this:

“He was led as a sheep to slaughter;
and as a lamb before its shearers is silent,
so He opens not His Mouth.
In His humiliation justice was denied Him.
Who shall recount His generation?

That is, since Yeshua died a physical death, He will have no physical descendants. This is a lament. But the lament proves to be unwarranted in Yeshua’s case, because He is raised from the dead, and in Him are many spiritual children, as Isaiah would say a few verses later: He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, and the will of Adonai will succeed by His hand (Isaiah 53:10b LXX). God does the unexpected, providing descendants for the One who died with neither wife nor children. For His life was taken away from the earth” (8:32-33).

The eunuch replied to Philip, “Please tell me, who is the prophet talking about – himself or someone else.” His confusion is understandable, since contemporary Jewish thought was divided on the interpretation. Isaiah did not meet the requirements of the passage, even though he was a servant of God. Then Philip, who was not slow to give an answer, opened his mouth. The phrase “to open one’s mouth,” is used when something of great significance is to follow. Here, then, is the climax of the conversation. Philip developed some common ground with the Ethiopian by talking about Isaiah, but made his way to proclaiming the Good News about Yeshua (8:34-35). Clearly, his first step was to show that Messiah was the One who fulfilled Isaiah’s prophecy. A description of the general character of Yeshua, and the way He suffered unjustly and was condemned to death, would prove the point.

The fact that Isaiah 53:7-8 was not the whole story, but just the starting place. Now as they were going down the road, they came to some water. The eunuch said: Look, water! What’s to prevent me from being immersed (8:36)? Obviously, Philip must have spoken to him of Peter’s speech regarding the appropriate response to the Good News, “Repent. Let each of you be immersed in the name of Messiah Yeshua because of the removal of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Ruach ha-Kodesh (2:38). In the same way, it can be assumed that the eunuch must have given Philip his profession of faith in Yeshua Messiah.¹⁸⁶ So the eunuch ordered the wagon to stop so he could make a public confession. Philip agreed and they both got down into the water and Philip immersed him (8:38). Immersion is the public confession of an inward conviction. So the eunuch not only confessed his faith personally to Philip but openly in front of his entire caravan.

But the lack of any clear mention of the eunuch’s profession of faith led some early scribe to “improve” on the story by adding this verse. “Philip said, ‘If you believe with all your heart, you man,’ the eunuch answered, ‘I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God’ (8:37).” The oldest and most reliable manuscripts, however, do not include this verse so neither do I.

When they came up out of the midst of the water, the Ruach Adonai snatched (Greek: harpazo, meaning caught up, to be taken away suddenly and miraculously) Philip away. This is the same word that Paul used when describing the rapture of the Church: After that, we who are still alive and are left will be snatched up (Greek: the root word is harpazo, meaning caught up) together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air (First Thessalonians 4:17), and the eunuch saw him no more. By performing this startling miracle the Ruach ha-Kodesh confirmed to the entire caravan that Philip was indeed His spokesman. As for the eunuch, he went on his way, rejoicing in the joy of the Lord (8:39). The joy of the Ethiopian, even after Philip’s abrupt departure, showed that his faith was firmly rooted in God, not in Philip. Luke does not give us the subsequent history of the Ethiopian eunuch, but according to Church Father Irenaeus, he became a missionary to the Ethiopians and perhaps established the first church on the continent of Africa.¹⁸⁷

But Philip found himself at Azotus (the new Greek name for Ashdod), some twenty miles north of Gaza. Philip continued doing the work of an evangelist as he passed through, he kept proclaiming the Good News to all the towns until he came to Caesarea (8:40). There, he married and settled down (21:8-9). As a result, Caesarea became the new center of Hellenistic Judean believers. It may have been due to Philip’s preaching in this area that churches were established in Lydda and Joppa (see Bd – Signs and Miracles Follow Peter). Caesarea continued to be a haven for Hellenistic Jewish believers until 66 AD when, as a result of the Jewish revolt, the leaders of the Messianic congregation in Caesarea immigrated out of the country to the province of Asia, or present-day Turkey.¹⁸⁸

In October 1857, J. Hudson Taylor began to minister in Ningpo, China, and he led a Mr. Nyi to Christ. The man was overjoyed and wanted to share his faith with others. “How long have you had the Good News in England?” Mr. Nyi asked Hudson Taylor one day. Taylor acknowledged that England had known the gospel for centuries. “My father died seeking the truth,” said Mr. Nyi. “Why didn’t you come sooner?” Taylor had no answer for this penetrating question. How long have you known the gospel? How far have you shared it personally?¹⁸⁹

The God of Isra’el desires to provide people with His rest and peace through an eternal relationship with Himself. The following five principles, taken from the prophet Isaiah, help us to recognize how we can have that relationship. Just as believers have often used a series of verses from Romans called “the Romans Road,” messianic believers, witnessing to Jews, can use a different series of verses from Isaiah called “the Isaiah Avenue.”

Sinners Before God

For all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteousness is like a filthy garment, and all of us wither like a leaf, and our iniquities carry us away, like the wind (Isaiah 64:5). We may judge ourselves by relative standards, thinking, “I’m as good as the next person,” or, “I’m no worse than the next guy.” Yet, God judges each of us by His absolute standards of Himself and His Torah: You shall be holy, for I, ADONAI your God, am holy (Leviticus 19:2). By His standards, we are all moral failures.

Granted, you may be a nice person, and you may remember to call your mom on Mother’s Day; it’s just that you and “the next person” still fall short of God’s high holy standards. By the way, every Messianic rabbi or pastor has the same problem. Psalm 14:3 declares: There is none that does good, no not one. We are all born with the fatal disease of sin passed down through Adam. So, no one can point fingers or throw stones at anyone else; we all have the same great problem of original sin.

Separation From God

Surely the arm of ADONAI is not too short to save, nor His ear to dull to hear. Rather, your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God. Your sins have hidden His face from you, so that He does not hear (Isaiah 59:1-2). The result of our sin nature is a broken relationship with God. Now you may pray and even fast, but the Bible is clear: He will not hear. It’s as if I stole money from you, and then had the nerve to come to you and ask for a gift! Your response should be, “first let’s deal with the past offense, then I can consider your present or future needs.” God wants to bless you, but your sin nature separates you from Him, and must be dealt with first before He can bless you.

Since this separation continues to our death, it becomes a judgment of everlasting separation from God. This breaks God’s heart. He truly loves you and desires you to have everlasting life with Him. That’s why the story doesn’t end here, but continues on with the Good News for your life.

Salvation In God

We all like sheep have gone astray. Each of us turned to our own way. So ADONAI has laid on Him [Messiah] the iniquity of us all (Isaiah 53:6). God has provided the way of salvation and forgiveness, since we can do nothing, no good deed, to save ourselves. The best fifteen minutes of our lives cannot save us; the greatest accomplishment of our lives cannot save us either. Because of His great love, God has promised to send Messiah to die as the atonement or payment for our sins. In the New Covenant, Messiah Yeshua states as well: I give My life as a ransom for many (Matthew 20:28). This is the salvation and right relationship that God offers freely.

The Savior Is God

For to us a child is born, a son will be given to us, and the government will be upon His shoulder. His Name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and shalom there will be no end – on the throne of David and over His Kingdom – to establish it and uphold it through justice and righteousness from now until forevermore. The zeal of ADONAI-Tzva’ot will accomplish this (Isaiah 9:5-6). Only God Himself could provide the perfect sacrifice for sins, as He alone is perfect. What amazing love and humility that the Mighty God of Isra’el would be born, live as a man, and die as the perfect payment for our sins. Messiah Yeshua is Adonai, the Lord.

Eternal Security With God

You keep in perfect peace one whose mind is steadfast on You, because he trusts in You (Isaiah 26:3). Perfect peace (shalom shalom) is found only in God and is accessible only through faith/trust/belief in Messiah. Simple acknowledgement of our sins and faith in Messiah Yeshua as our substitute, our sacrifice, our saving atonement, is the necessary action to a right relationship with God. The Bible says: Abraham believed God, and He credited it to him as righteousness (Genesis 15:6). Like Abraham, you can have a right relationship with God by faith in what He alone has provided. Here’s a simple prayer that help you:

Lord, please forgive me for all my sins through Messiah’s sacrifice on the cross for me.
Help me to follow Yeshua and honor You.
Thank You for loving me. Amen.¹⁹⁰

If you have prayed this prayer, see my commentary on The Life of Christ Bw – What God Does for Us at the Moment of Faith.

Simon the Sorcerer
The Samaritans are Saved
Through the Preaching of Peter
8: 9-25

34 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

Simon the Sorcerer DIG: What do Simon and Philip have in common in verses 5-11? How are they different? How has the crowd responded to both men in the past? Why would Peter and John come to them? Why might the Father delay pouring out His Spirit until Peter and John were on the scene? Do you think this was more of a lesson for the Samaritans or for the apostles? Why? In what ways does Simon’s reaction to the apostles in verses 18 and 19 show his deep understanding about the gospel? Do you think that Simon’s words in verse 24 reveal a change in his heart? Why or why not?

REFLECT: What cultural or ethnic prejudices were you brought up with? How is the gospel breaking through those prejudices in your life? What was your primary motivation in receiving Yeshua Messiah as Savior? What’s your primary motivation for continuing in the faith? Has your personal influence declined or increased since you became a believer? How? Why? Has jealousy of other believers hindered you in any way?

Having introduced Philip, the protagonist, into the story, Luke now turns to Simon, the antagonist. Although Simon had a Hebrew name, he was a Samaritan. At first he appeared to be a genuine believer. Even one as discerning as Philip accepted him as such and immersed him. Simon even continued on with Philip (8:13). Thus, he manifested the three marks of a genuine believer: he believed, he was obedient in immersion, and he continued with Philip. So Simon illustrates how hard it is to tell the wheat from the weeds (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Ev – The Parable of the Wheat and the Weeds).

Where did Simon go wrong? How did one who came so close miss out on true salvation? Faith must be grounded in truth, and his was not. This passage reveals four glaring faults in Simon’s theology. First, he had a wrong view of self. Now a man named Simon had an egotistical view of himself. Practicing magic in the city and astonishing the people of Samaria led him to claim that he was someone great. Simon may have merely been a magician who liked having powers and controlling people. Or he may have been the leader of a heretical Jewish Gnostic sect. Gnostics usually claimed various spiritual beings in a chain of command leading to God and proposed set of practices as the means for attaining higher spiritual levels in their religious cult. He may well have been in touch with the supernatural; but it would have been with demons, not the power of God. Simon’s sin in verses 18-23 below confirms his ungodliness.¹⁷¹ Simon’s hold on the people of Samaria was complete. They all were paying special attention to him. Impressed by his powers of the occult, they mistakenly declared: This man is the power of God that is called “Great.” That title showed that Simon claimed deity for himself. And they kept paying attention to him, because for a long time he had astonished them with his magical arts (8:9-11). As long as Simon believed he was deity, he could not come to a proper sense of himself. Only the humble, aware of their inadequacies and shortcomings, have that sense of being lost that drives them to ADONAI. Simon, firmly locked in pride’s grip, did not.

Second, Simon had a wrong view of salvation. Through Philip’s preaching, revival broke out in the city: When they believed Philip proclaiming the Good News about the kingdom of God and the name of Messiah Yeshua, both men and women were immersed. The Samaritans needed to come to the realization that the kingdom of God would be a Jewish Kingdom and not a Samaritan Kingdom as they had thought (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ca – Jesus Talks With a Samaritan Woman). So as more and more people believed in Messiah for their salvation, Simon saw his following dwindle. His declining popularity, his wish to be associated with God in some way, and his desire to learn more about what he perceived to be Philip’s power, motivated Simon to believe. And after being immersed, he continued with Philip as an opportunity to get that power and have more influence over people. And when he saw signs and great miracles happening, he was continually amazed (8:12-13). He had, so to speak, a professional interest in finding out the source of Philip’s amazing power. But his “faith” was grounded in the power miracles, not in the saving power of the Messiah. What he saw resulted in amazement, not holiness.

The Samaritans are saved: Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the message of God, they sent Peter and John to check it out (This is the last mention of John in Acts, as Peter, then Paul, take center stage). The Samaritans despised Jerusalem, would they reject the apostles because they were from the Holy City? Would the Jews reject the Samaritans? It was shocking to them that the Samaritans could be included in the Kingdom because they practiced a hybrid religion (Luke 9:54). So apostles were sent for three reasons. First, to authenticate Samaritan salvation. Secondly, because Peter had the keys to the Kingdom. And thirdly, they came down and prayed for them to receive the Ruach ha-Kodesh. Although the Samaritans had believed and been immersed, the Ruach had not yet come upon them, they had only been immersed in the name of the Lord Yeshua (8:14-16). 

Those who teach that believers receive the Spirit subsequent to salvation appeal to this and similar passages for support. Here is a clear example, they argue, of people who were saved, yet did not have the Ruach ha-Kodesh. Such teaching ignores the transitional nature of Acts (see below). It also fails in the face of the plain teaching of Scripture that if anyone does not have the Ruach of Messiah, he does not belong to Him (Romans 8:9). There is no such thing as a believer who does not yet have the Ruach ha-Kodesh, since by one Spirit we were all immersed into one body at conversion (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Bw – What God Does For Us at the Moment of Faith).

Why did the Samaritans (and later the Gentiles) have to wait for the apostles before receiving the Ruach? If the Samaritans had received the Ruach ha-Kodesh independent of the Messianic Community, the rift between them would have been perpetuated. There could well have been two separate entities, a Messianic Congregation and Samaritan Church. But God designed one Messianic Congregation/Church: For He Himself is our peace, who had made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility (Ephesians 2:14).

God is never late. By delaying the Spirit’s coming until Peter and John arrived, ADONAI preserved the unity of the Messianic Congregation/Church. The apostles needed to see for themselves, and give first hand testimony to the Messianic Community in Jerusalem, that the Ruach had come upon the Samaritans. In addition, the Samaritans needed to learn that they were subject to the authority of the apostles. The Jewish believers and the Samaritan believers were linked together into one Body. When Peter and John arrived, they began laying their hands on the Samaritan believers and it became obvious that they were receiving the Ruach ha-Kodesh as evidenced by the speaking in languages (8:17).¹⁷² Nowhere does the Bible teach that the gift of tongues is anything other than human languages.¹⁷³

A closer look at the keys to the Kingdom: At Caesarea Philippi Peter declared that Yeshua was the Messiah, the Son of the living God. In response, Jesus said: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Fx – On This Rock I Will Build My Church). Whenever the words key or keys is used symbolically in the Bible, it always symbolizes the authority to open or close doors (Judges 3:25; First Chronicles 9:27; Isaiah 22:20-24; Matthew 16:19a; Revelation 1:18, 3:7, 9:1 and 20:1). Peter will be responsible to open the doors of the Church. He has a special role in the book of Acts. In the Dispensation of the Torah, humanity was divided into two groups, Jews and Gentiles. But in the Dispensation of Grace, because of what went on in the intertestamental period, there were three groups of people, Jews, Gentiles and Samaritans (Matthew 10:5-6). Peter would be the key person (pun intended) in bringing in the Jews (Acts 2), the Samaritans (Acts 8), and the Gentiles (Acts 10) into the Church by receiving the Holy Spirit. Once he opened the door it stayed open.

As we proceed through the book of Acts we will be comparing the way salvation comes to the Jews, the Samaritans and the Gentiles, showing, as was the case with the way Yeshua healed, there is no set order. Acts is a transitional book and a historical book, and you cannot establish doctrine based upon history. You base doctrine on clear theological statements. The historical facts can illustrate the doctrine, but they cannot develop doctrine on their own.

The gift of languages (tongues) can be seen four times in the book, Acts 2, Acts 8, Acts 10 and Acts 19. There is no set order leading up to immersion by the Spirit and subsequent speaking in languages. In Acts 2 with salvation coming to the Jews, the order was first repentance, then water immersion, and then receiving Spirit immersion by the Ruach ha-Kodesh as evidenced by speaking in languages. Here in Acts 8 with salvation coming to the Samaritans, the order was this, first they believed, then came water immersion, then the apostles arrived, next they laid their hands on the Samaritans, and then they received Spirit immersion by the Ruach ha-Kodesh as evidenced by the speaking languages. Again, you don’t build doctrine on history. Keep this order in mind and we will see how it was different with the Samaritans, the Gentiles and John’s disciples.

To understand the differences in the four appearances of languages in Acts, we will ask six questions as we come to each passage. However, the one key common element in all four cases is that languages (ie tongues) are for the purpose of authentication.

1. Who received it? The believers of Samaria.

2. What were they? They were Samaritans, who historically did not like Jews and were antagonistic toward Jerusalem. In fact, they often attacked and even killed Jews who were headed from Galilee to Yerushalayim through Samaria (Luke 9:51-53).

3. What were the circumstances? Philip preached to the Samaritans who believed and were saved. But this raised some questions from the apostles in Tziyon who had the old Samaritan antagonism in mind. So Peter and John were sent to authenticate these reports.

4. What was the means? The laying on of hands by Peter and John, apostles, who came from Jerusalem.

5. What was the purpose in this context? As is in every case in the book of Acts, speaking in tongues is used for the purpose of authentication. That was true in Acts 2, is true here in Acts 8, and it will be true in Acts 10 and Acts 19, the four places it is found. For the Jewish apostles it proved that the Samaritans were able to be saved. It was hard for them to believe, but that’s what it would authenticate for the apostles in Tziyon. And for the Samaritans it authenticated the authority of the Jewish apostles. This was to teach the Samaritans that they were not to create a separate Samaritan Church because that’s exactly what they had done when the Jews rejected them when Ezra returned to Palestine from the Babylonian Captivity to rebuild the Temple (see the commentary on Ezra-Nehemiah As – Opposition to Rebuilding the Temple). They built their own rival Temple on Mount Gerizim with a holy place and a most holy place. So they were not to build a Samaritan Church in opposition to the Messianic Community/Church.

6. What were the results? The Samaritans did receive the immersion of the Ruach ha-Kodesh and became members of the Body of Messiah, and no rival Samaritan Church was ever set up.¹⁷⁴

Now back to Simon the sorcerer. This passage reveals the third of four glaring faults in Simon’s theology. Third, he had a wrong view of the Spirit. Now when Simon saw that the Ruach ha-Kodesh was given through the laying on of hands by the apostles as evidenced by the speaking in other languages it was way too much for him. Philip had impressed him, but Peter and John had overwhelmed him. It was obvious that something supernatural must have occurred. Simon offered them money, saying: Give this power to me, too – so that anyone on whom I lay hands may receive the Ruach ha-Kodesh. He treated the two apostles as though they were fellow practitioners of magic and was ready to negotiate the price to buy the secret of their power. Nothing God has, however, is for sale. Certainly not the Ruach ha-Kodesh. Therefore, Peter was irate and said to him, “May your silver go to ruin, and you with it (J. B. Phillips’ rendering, “To hell with you and your money!” conveys the actual sense of Peter’s words) – because you thought you could buy God’s gift with money. You have no part or share in this matter, because your heart is not right before God (8:18-21). Simon’s view of the Ruach as a commodity to be bought and added to his repertoire of spiritual tricks was utterly detestable and betrayed his lost condition.

Fourth, Simon had a wrong view of sin. Peter followed his condemnation of Simon with a call for salvation. Therefore, repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible (if you repent), the intent of your heart may be pardoned. Peter, using the expression for the most serious offenses against God in the TaNaKh (Deuteronomy 18:18-20), warns Simon of the seriousness of his situation: For I see in you the poison of bitterness and the bondage of unrighteousness! Simon, however, was not persuaded. Although probably shaken and afraid, he refused to ask the Lord for forgiveness. Instead, he said to the apostles, “Pray for me, so that none of what you have said may come upon me” (8:22-24) His only concern to escape the consequences of his sin. True repentance, however, consists of more than mere sorrow for sin (Second Corinthians 7:9-10).¹⁷⁵

So when they had testified and spoken the word of the Lord, they returned to Jerusalem, continually proclaiming the Good News to many Samaritan villages (8:25). In sum, this file shows the gospel as it begins to move away from an exclusive concern of Isra’el. The gospel is for every person, for each one to consider, it is hoped, with ears and a heart that responds. This is as true today as it was then. Here we see Jews crossing racial and ethnic lines with the gospel, the message of hope to the Samaritans, and taking that initiative is at the heart of the Messianic Community’s/Church’s mission in the world: Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, immersing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Ruach ha-Kodesh, teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely, I am with you always, to the very end of the age (Matthew 28:18b-20).¹⁷⁶

The Good News Spreads to Samaria
8: 5-8

34 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

The good news spreads to Samaria DIG: Why was it important for the Hellenistic Jews to be driven out of Jerusalem? How did God use Philip? Why do you suppose He worked this way in this case? Who were the Samaritans, and why were they despised so much by the Jews?

REFLECT: In what ways is the gospel like sowing seed? How was the gospel sown in your life before you became a believer? How much do you desire to see unbelievers from other cultures come to the Lord? Do you intentionally reach out to share your testimony? Or are you content to stay within your “holy huddle?”

The scattering of the Hellenistic Jews led to the most significant step forward in the mission of the congregations of God. One might say that it required persecution to make them fulfill the implicit command of 1:8. As the Hellenistic Jews moved into new areas, they found a ready response to the gospel, and this was exemplified by the way in which the Samaritan people responded to it.¹⁶⁹

Philip was not one of the apostles, but a Greek-speaking Jew because the apostles remained in Jerusalem. He was one of the seven chosen to serve the needs of the Hellenistic Jewish widows (6:5). Like Stephen, his faithfulness to that task led ADONAI to use him in a wider ministry. Later in the book of Acts, Phillip is called the evangelist (21:8).

As a result of the persecution of the Hellenistic Jews in Jerusalem, Philip went down from the high plateau of Tziyon to a city [in] Samaria (8:5a). This was not the Samaria of the TaNaKh. In 30 BC, after the Assyrians had destroyed the ancient capital of the northern Kingdom, the Roman Emperor Augustus awarded it to Herod the Great who renamed it Sebaste (the feminine form of the Greek word Sebastos or Augustus). This was merely a city in Samaria. In New Covenant times the term Samaria was no longer applicable to a city, but to a region, like Galilee or Judea.

Who were the Samaritans? Six hundred years before this, the Assyrians conquered this area of northern Isra’el and they deported them from the area. The king of Assyria invaded the entire land, marched against Samaria and laid siege to it for three years. In the ninth year of Hoshea, the king of Assyria captured Samaria and deported the wealthy and middle-class Israelites to Assyria. He settled them in Halah in Gozan on the Harbor River and in the towns of the Medes (Second Kings 17:5-6). There they lived in a pagan population with its vast empire. The king of Assyria brought people from Babylon, Kuthah, Avva, Hamath and Sepharvaim and settled them in the towns of Samaria to replace the Israelites. They took over Samaria and lived in its towns (Second Kings 17:24). Those pagans intermarried with the lowest classes of the remaining Jews in northern Isra’el, and from those people came the Samaritans. Because the Israelites intermarried with the Assyrians, the Samaritans worshiped ADONAI, but they also served other gods in accordance with the customs of the nations from which they had been brought (Second Kings 17:33). The Jews hated the Samaritans and considered them compromising half-breeds who corrupted the true worship of YHVH.

Philip, who proclaimed the Messiah to the Samaritans (8:5b) even though the Samaritans only accepted the five books of Moshe as their Holy Scriptures (see the commentary on Ezra-Nehemiah, to see link click As – Opposition to Rebuilding the Temple), Philip’s mission to them initially fulfilled ADONAI’s express command in 1:8. Because the Samarians did not accept the prophets of the Jewish TaNaKh, they believed the next prophet to come on the scene would be the Messiah. So it was no surprise that with one accord, the crowds continued to pay close attention to what Philip was saying since the expectation of a coming future deliverer known as the ta’be, or restorer, who would restore “true worship” on Mount Gerizim, was a major part of Samaritan theology (Deuteronomy 18:15ff). Given that foundation of belief, Philip could simply proclaim Yeshua as the long-awaited Messiah.

Despite the hostile relations between the Jews and the Samaritans at the time, Philip found a receptive audience in Samaria. The Ruach ha-Kodesh prepared their hearts to respond to Philip’s message as they both heard and saw the signs that he was doing (8:6). Because the apostles had laid hands on him (6:6), Philip had the same ability as they did to perform signs and miracles that acted as a confirmation of his message. The only people performing signs and miracles in Acts are the apostles, or those designated by the apostles. Nowhere in Acts was this ability given to believers in general. And in this context this was especially essential because of the activity of Satan (see Ba – Simon the Sorcerer). Simon deceived people with his ability to perform counterfeit miracles. So it was necessary for Philip to perform miracles: For unclean spirits, or demons, were coming out of many who were plagued, shrieking with a loud voice. Many paralyzed and crippled were healed also, to counteract Simon’s “miracles.” The Adversary mustered all his forces in a futile effort to oppose God; however, He was still healing the demon-possessed through those designated to do so by the apostles. So there was great joy in that city (8:7-8).

There are still many demon-possessed people today. But despite the claims of current faith healers, believers do not have any authority or ability to command or directly drive out demons. The temporary sign gift of miracles was the power (Greek: dunamis) to drive out demons. Like other sign gifts, that gift no longer exists. As the apostles passed away, so did the need for sign gifts. As with physical healing, however, we can pray for God to intercede, who always hears and who has all power.

Nowhere in Scripture are believers told to “bind Satan” or exercise authority over demons. In fact, if someone thinks they are binding Satan, they are doing a pretty lousy job, because he is still very active in my neighborhood. The devil will not be bound until a holy angel does so at the beginning of the Messianic Kingdom (see the commentary on Revelation Fb – He Seized the Dragon, or Satan, and Bound Him for a Thousand Years). And those who attempt to assert their authority over demons risk winding up like the Jewish exorcists, the sons of Sceva, of Acts 19:13-16. It is dangerous to claim for ourselves authority that ADONAI has not granted to us. The biblical instruction for conducting spiritual warfare is laid out in Ephesians 6:10-18.

The powerful miracles and preaching of Philip resulted, as it had in Yerushalayim, in the salvation of many Samaritans. But as true biblical preaching inevitably does, it produced two vastly different responses. Many accepted the gospel and believed, so that there was great joy in that city. They were the true believers, the wheat. Their joy didn’t come from demons, but from complete deliverance from sin through the Lord Yeshua Messiah. Others, however, were false believers, the weeds (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ev – The Parable of the Wheat and the Weeds).¹⁷⁰ Having introduced the protagonist in the story, Luke now turns to the antagonist – a certain man named Simon.

Witness in Judea and Samaria
8:5 to 11:18

34-42 AD

On Sunday, January 8, 1956, on the shore of a lonely river deep in the Ecuadorian jungle, five missionaries were murdered by primitive Auca Indians. News of the massacre shocked the world. To some, their deaths seemed a senseless tragedy. Many decried the promising missionary careers cut short, the five wives grieving for their husbands, and the children left fatherless. At first glance, like Stephen’s death, it seemed so pointless.

More than pointless, Stephen’s ministry seemed to have ended in failure. Not only was he killed as a heretic, but his death also triggered the first persecution against the entire Messianic community. That persecution, spearheaded by Sha’ul of Tarsus, scattered the large numbers of Hellenistic believers and probably many Jewish believers as well. But in the final analysis, the persecution that seemed to be so negative, was really a positive factor. It led to the first great missionary outreach by early believers. The Adversary’s attempt to stamp out the fire of the early Messianic community, merely scattered the members and started new fires around the world. In the words of the early Church Father Tertullian, “The blood of the martyrs became the seed of the Church.”

The Messianic communities first missionary effort, which begins in these chapters, was foreshadowed by Chapter 5, when people form the cities near Jerusalem brought their sick for the apostles to be healed (5:16). Stephen’s outreach to Hellenistic Jews, those from foreign lands, was a step in the right direction. These chapters mark another turning point. Jerusalem, which has dominated the story line up to this point, begins to settle into the background, illustrating the truth that opportunity ignored is opportunity lost.¹⁶⁸

Yeshua Messiah had given Peter the keys to the kingdom (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Fx – On This Rock I Will Build My Church), and he would be responsible for bringing the three known ethnic groups of his day into the kingdom of God. We have already seen his opening the door to salvation for the Jews on the festival of Shavu’ot (see An – Peter Speaks to the Shavu’ot Crowd). Next, in Chapter Eight, Peter will open the door to salvation for the Samaritans (see Ba – Simon the Sorcerer), and finally in Chapter Ten, Peter will open the door to salvation to the Gentiles (see Bg – Peter Goes to the House of Cornelius). The Messianic Community/Church will continue to grow, but the explosive days of the miracles of the apostles will fade into the background. Paul wrote that the gospel came first to the Jew and then to the Gentile (Romans 1:16). The murder of Stephen almost surely fixed a point of the gospel’s final rejection by the Sanhedrin, and ADONAI’s design for the Good News to move out into new territory began.

The Stoning of Stephen
7:54 to 8:4

31-33 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

The stoning of Stephen DIG: Why are Stephen’s listeners so enraged? Stephen’s death was illegal (John 18:31). What does that reveal about the desperation of the Great Sanhedrin? How is Stephen’s death and Sha’ul’s persecution an example of ADONAI using evil to fulfill His plan (1:8)? This begins a new phase in God’s plan (1:8). How would you sum up the “Jerusalem phase” in Chapters 2 through 7?

REFLECT: What is the worst thing that has ever happened to you? Can you see now how God used it for good? Or, are you angry with Him? How is that working for you? It is best to understand who the enemy is, and it’s not the Lord. It is the Adversary, the thief who comes only to steal and kill and destroy (John 10:10a CSB). Peter’s speech led to a mass conversion (2:14-41), while Stephen’s led to his death. What does that teach us about success in your service of the Kosher King? What opportunities have you been given lately to profess the goodness and faithfulness of God? How have you handled these situations? How can you be better prepared next time to declare your witness of Him with more natural assurance?

The Sanhedrin no doubt listened to the earlier part of Stephen’s speech with interest and agreement. After all, he was merely reciting the nation’s history – a topic near and dear to their hearts. But as his meaning became increasingly clear, they began to grow more and more uncomfortable. When they heard him say that they were stiff-necked and always resisting the Ruach ha-Kodesh (7:51), they were cut to the heart (literally sawed in half). And began gnashing their teeth at him (7:54). This foreshadows the stubborn generation of sinners to come. When the fourth angel pours out his bowl of wrath and judgment during the Great Tribulation, sinners who refuse to repent will gnaw their tongues in agony and curse God (Revelation 16:10b-11). Obviously Stephen’s speech was designed to produce a reaction, as was Peter’s speech when the crowd in the Temple compound was also cut to the heart (2:37). But there the message produced repentance and faith, here it only produced rage and fury.¹⁵⁴ This was at least the third time they had heard the gospel presented (4:8ff and 5:27ff), yet their anger only escalated and, like Pharaoh, they only continued to harden their hearts. People who reject God’s grace and love will not feel remorse under His judgment. In fact, it will only make them angrier.

In contrast, the emphasis in Stephen’s life was characterized by fullness. He was full of the Ruach ha-Kodesh and wisdom (6:3 and 10), full of faith (6:5), and full of grace and power (6:8). In Scripture, to be full of means to be controlled by. Stephen was a God–controlled man yielded to the Holy Spirit, a man who sought to lead people to Messiah.¹⁵⁵

In the eye of the storm that was about to be unleashed, he remained calm, totally yielded to the Spirit’s control. The Ruach produces the fruit of godly living in believer’s daily lives. But, as He did for Stephen, He also provides a special grace and strength in times of crisis (Luke 12:11-12; First Peter 4:14). Believers, then, must not shy away from difficult situations. Like Paul, they can say: I delight in weakness, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong in Messiah (Second Corinthians 12:10). We must boldly acknowledge Yeshua in all situations and circumstances, knowing that the Ruach ha-Kodesh will grant us the grace to face the consequences with peace and joy.

In the midst of his circumstances, Stephen gazed into heaven and saw God’s Sh’khinah, the visible manifestation of God’s presence – and Yeshua standing at the right hand of God (Psalm 110:1). Elsewhere in the B’rit Chadashah, Yeshua is described as being seated at the right hand of God (Matthew 22:44, 24:64; Luke 22:69; Acts 2:34; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3, 8:1, 10:11-12 and 12:2). He is seated in terms of His redemptive work, which is forever completed (Hebrews 10:12). Stephen, however, sees Jesus standing to show His concern for him. He also stands to welcome Stephen into heaven. He was one of only a few in Scripture blessed with a glimpse into heaven, along with Isaiah (Isaiah 6:1-3), Ezeki’el (Ezeki’el 1:26-28), Paul (Second Corinthians 12:2-4), and John (Revelation 4:1ff).

As Messiah watched, He didn’t miss a single nod of Sha’ul’s head. The Son of Man was on His feet at the time. One can only imagine His mixed emotions as He looked at the two key players in the Kingdom that day. One for Him; one against Him. One covered in blood; the other covered in a prayer shawl. One who could not save himself from men; the other who could not save himself from sin. One dead in the body but alive in spirit; the other alive in the body but dead in the spirit. One loved by God; and the other loved God.¹⁵⁶

And he said, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God” (7:55-56)! For the Sanhedrin, such a statement was the last straw, their tolerance for the blasphemer was exhausted. Stephen’s use of the phrase Son of Man, and it is used here for the last time in the B’rit Chadashah, may have been the sharpest dagger because it took them back to the trial of another prisoner. Like Stephen, false witnesses accused Yeshua of blasphemy, yet He remained silent. Finally in frustration, the high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God; tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God. You have said so, Jesus replied. But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven (Matthew 26:63-64). So for that so-called blasphemy of claiming to be the Son of God and the Son of Man who would sit on God’s right hand, the very same Sanhedrin members had crucified Messiah. Stephen’s vision and words describing who he saw threw the claim that Yeshua made right back in their faces. Yeshua claimed He would be at the right hand of the Mighty One; Stephen was asserting that He was there! Therefore, the Sanhedrin was once again on the horns of a dilemma. They had to either kill Stephen also, or admit that they were wrong and Yeshua wasn’t really demon possessed (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Ek – It is only by Beelzebub, the Prince of Demons, That This Fellow Drives Out Demons). The Sanhedrin choose to silence the truth by killing Stephen.¹⁵⁷

They covered their ears; and crying out with a loud voice, they rushed at him like a mob with one impulse (7:57). This is hardly the behavior from the Jewish Supreme Court. It is not clear whether those who rushed at Stephen included some of his Greek-speaking accusers along with the angrier members of the Sanhedrin (which had not even delivered a verdict). In any chase, experienced jurists should have sensed the anger and taken steps to protect Stephen rather than joining in with the mob. Either the Sanhedrin had decided to get Stephen out of the way without an honest trial, or the judges allowed emotion to overrule reason after his inflammatory speech.

Driving him out of the city, they began stoning him (7:58a). Deuteronomy 17:2-7 states that the stoning was to take place outside the city gates, and the witnesses to the criminal act were to be the first to stone the convicted criminal. Leviticus 24:24 makes the same point: They took the blasphemer outside the camp and let all that heard him, lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation stone him.¹⁵⁸

The Oral Law (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ei – The Oral Law) deals with the punishment of stoning: The place of stoning was as the height of two men. One of the witnesses pushed him down by his hips. If he turned over face forward, the witness should turn him on his back. If he died from the blow and the fall, that was enough. But if not, the second witness took a stone and dropped it on his chest. If he died from this, that was enough. But if not, his stoning had to be carried out by all Isra’el, as it is said: The hand of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death and afterward the hand of all the people (Deuteronomy 17:17) (Sanhedrin 6:4).

And the witnesses laid down their cloaks to be able to throw their stones more effectively (7:58b). Compare what the Talmud says about carrying out the sentence of stoning: When the trial is over, take him [the condemned person] out to be stoned. The place of the stoning was at a distance from the court, as it is said: Take out the one who is accursed (Leviticus 24:14). A man stands at the entrance of the court; in his hand is the signaling flag (Hebrew: sudarin). A horseman was stationed far away but within sight of him. If one [of the judges] says, “I have something [more] to say in his favor,” the signaler waves the sudarin, and the horseman runs and stops the stoning. Even if the condemned person himself says, “I have something to say in my favor,” they must bring him back, even four or five times, only provided that there is some substance to what he is saying (Sanhedrin 42b). Even though there were these formal procedures for stoning laid down by the Oral Law, it seems unlikely that they were followed, just like the Sanhedrin failed to abide by their own rules in the execution of Yeshua (see The Life of Christ Lh – The Laws of the Great Sanhedrin Regarding Trials).

Sha’ul was probably disgusted over the way the Pharisees had mishandled the problem. If he wanted it done right, he’d probably have to do it himself. So Sha’ul packed up his things and headed for Jerusalem, salivating for the chance to be the hero. He arrived in the Holy City just in time to hear an infuriating speech from Stephen.¹⁵⁹

And the witnesses laid down their cloaks at the feet of a young man named Sha’ul (7:58c). Once again we see Luke’s literary skill as he artfully introduces Sha’ul into the story, which he had already done with Barnabas (4:36), Stephen and Philip (6:5).

Despite their anger, the Sanhedrin apparently tried to give Stephen’s murder the appearance of formal justice. It is true that the Romans took the right of capital punishment away from the Jews about the time Yeshua was born. Pontius Pilate, however, was still the governor, and the Sanhedrin knew they had nothing to fear from him. He had proved his vacillating weakness in permitting the execution of Messiah, whom he knew to be innocent. But he had Him crucified anyway, because he feared the Jews would cause him to lose his position (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lq – Jesus Sentenced to Be Crucified). In spite of his efforts, he was in serious trouble with Rome, which would shortly recall him as governor. Moreover, he normally lived in Caesarea, not in Yerushalayim, and hence, was probably nowhere near this scene. Besides, he had bigger problems to tend to.¹⁶⁰

They went on stoning Stephen as he was calling out, “Lord Yeshua, receive my spirit” (7:59)! Stephen’s last words were a prayer for himself and for his executioners. Like Jesus, he surrendered his spirit; but whereas the dying Messiah committed Himself to God, “Into Your hands I commit My spirit; deliver Me, ADONAI, my faithful God” (Psalm 31:5 and Luke 23:46), Stephen committed himself to his Lord whom he had seen in his vision. This is a striking example of the words originally applied to the Father being addressed to the Son. It shows how the early Messianic Community viewed Yeshua as being equal with YHVH.¹⁶¹

In addition, this confession of Stephen shows that he expected to enter the Lord’s presence as soon as he died. The Scriptures don’t teach any delay at all between life here and life in heaven, either in some holding place such as purgatory or some unconscious state called soul-sleep. Instead, the Bible teaches that believers enter Messiah’s presence immediately following death (Second Corinthians 5:8; Philippians 1:23). Yeshua promised the thief on the cross that He would take him to Paradise with Abraham (the abode of the righteous of the TaNaKh) that very day (Luke 23:43). His parable of the rich man and Lazarus (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Hx – The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus) taught that the dead are never unconscious or unaware of their circumstances. The book of Revelation describes the Tribulation martyrs as being awake and in the presence of God, and able to plead with the Lord for vengeance on their murderers (see the commentary on Revelation Cp – The Fifth Seal: I Saw Under the Altar Those Who Had Been Slain).¹⁶²

The mob poured out all their bitterness on Stephen by stoning Him mercilessly. Then he fell on his knees and cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them!” Echoing the words of Yeshua (Luke 23-34), Stephen prayed for the pardon of his executioners. His words were in striking contrast to his attitude of denunciation during his speech, and illustrates how a believer can love the sinner and hate the sin. After he said this, he died (7:60). He slipped into the presence of his Lord. And like his name Stephanos, meaning crown, he undoubtedly received the crown of life from his heavenly Father (see the commentary on Revelation Cc – For We Must All Appear Before the Judgment Seat of Christ). Stephen was a shooting star. He had one brief performance. One chance on stage. But it was absolutely unforgettable. As the curtain fell on his life, he received a standing ovation from his audience of One. How sweet to imagine the first heavenly words he heard that day, “Welcome Stephanos, My joy and My crown.”¹⁶³

How were they legally able to stone Stephen under Roman law of that day that took away the right of capital punishment from the Sanhedrin? We have already seen this in the case of Yeshua. Now we don’t know exactly when this event took place. But it could have very well happened in 35 AD. In that year, Vitellus became the new Roman general over all Syria, of which the land of Isra’el was a part as far as the Romans were concerned. It was Vitellus that deposed Pontius Pilate as procurator. But it took several months before the new procurator arrived and Stephen’s stoning could have happened in the interim.

Below is a summary statement that prepares us for what is to follow. These summary statements in Acts can be seen in four places (2:43-47, 4:32-37; 5:12-16 and here). It is important to distinguish between summary statements and transition statements; the former only occur in the first eight chapters of Acts, and the latter occur in various places throughout the book.

Yet there was at least one man who remained unmoved and was not sorry to see him die. Now Sha’ul was in agreement (Greek: suneudokon, meaning a degree of pleasure and satisfaction) with Stephen’s execution (22:20). He was pleased. The imperfect verb shows that he was virtually cheering throughout the entire ordeal. He just didn’t give his approval when Stephen breathed his last breath. He cheered every blow, like points on a scoreboard. It wouldn’t be easy to convert such a man. But Stephen’s words of forgiveness were to have a permanent impact on Sha’ul. The seed might take a while to germinate, but the rabbi from Tarsus would never escape the witness of Stephen.¹⁶⁴

On that very day a great persecution arose against Messiah’s community in Jerusalem. It was a great persecution because the previous two persecutions came only from the Sadducees, whereas now the Pharisees, who were by far the majority, had joined them. Luke wishes to emphasize that the successful attack on Stephen was the signal for a wider attack on the believers in Tziyon, no doubt instigated by the Sanhedrin. And they were all scattered (Greek: diesparesan, this is where we get the word diaspora from) throughout the region of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles (8:1). It was sufficient for them to flee to the countryside of Judea and Samaria to escape from danger. It is significant that some of the believers were prepared to stay in Samaria and that they did not experience opposition there from the Samaritans. It can be presumed that the opposition from Jerusalem came from the Sanhedrin and that it was directed primarily against Stephen’s Hellenistic brethren in Messiah’s Community. The apostles were left alone. The fact that they could stay in Jerusalem confirms the suspicion that it was mainly the Hellenistic believers that was being attacked.

Like faithful watchmen, the apostles remained at their posts, shepherding their flock. Jerusalem was still their mission field. Despite that it was dangerous to do so, some devout men buried Stephen properly and mourned deeply for him (8:2). Their act was both defiant public protest and a statement of their perception that Stephen was righteous. Such mourning often lasted from thirty (Deuteronomy 34:8) to seventy (Genesis 50:3) days. No doubt the Roman authorities connived at what was going on; in any cause the attack probably lasted only a short while (as most periods of persecution tend to be), and many believers may have slipped back into Yerushalayim once things cooled down.¹⁶⁵

A different kind of religious zeal was demonstrated by Sha’ul who took a leading role in the persecution of the Messianic Community. But Sha’ul was continually destroying Messiah’s community, entering house after house; and dragging off men and women, he was throwing them into prison (8:3). Not content to harass the believers in Jerusalem, he persecuted the followers of the Way to their death, arresting both men and women, dragging them out forcibly and continually throwing them into prison (Acts 22:4). He went from one synagogue to another to have them punished and tried to force them to blaspheme. He was so obsessed with persecuting them that he even hunted them down in foreign cities (26:11), with the permission of the Sanhedrin (22:5). In Rabbi Sha’ul’s zeal for his beliefs (Galatians 1:13), he fulfilled the Lord’s prediction in John 16:2: They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God. He sincerely thought he was serving Ha’Shem by imprisoning and executing believers. And only a direct intervention with the Lord Yeshua Messiah would persuade him otherwise.¹⁶⁶

For Messiah’s stated purposes (1:8) the scattering of believers, especially Hellenistic believers, which seemed like a disaster, proved to be a great blessing because those who had been scattered, like seed, and went around, like itinerant pastors, proclaiming the Word (8:4). As Joseph said to his brothers after earlier persecution: You meant it for evil, but God used it for good (Genesis 50:20; Romans 8:28).

Lord Jesus, You have told us that our trying times of persecution are opportunities for us to bear witness to Your name. Fill us with faith to know that when these moments arise, You will give us such words and a wisdom that none of our adversaries will be able to resist or contradict. Even when betrayed by parents, brothers, relatives, and friends – hated because of Your name – we know that our salvation is secure in You.¹⁶⁷

Stephen’s Testimony to the Sanhedrin
6:8 to 7:53

31-33 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various belivers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

Stephen’s testimony to the Sanhedrin DIG: From 6:13-14, how would you write up the formal charges against Stephen? What does Stephen’s defense (in effect a history lesson) reveal about his respect for the Torah? Why did Stephen spend the bulk of his defense speaking about Moshe? What parallels did he make between Moshe and Yeshua? How did that relate to the charges against him in 6:13-14? How does the quote in verse 37 begin to turn the tables on his accusers regarding who was really rejecting Moses? From verses 44-50, what is Stephen’s point about the Temple and God’s presence? How is he turning the tables against his accusers once again? Look at Deuteronomy 10:16 and 30:4. What does Stephen mean by the phrase uncircumcised hearts and ears? In this context, what is Stephen really saying about the Great Sanhedrin’s regard for Moshe and the Torah? Of what does he accuse them in verses 51-53? Therefore, considering the circumstances, what type of a person was Stephen?

REFLECT: Since the Great Sanhedrin knew their history every bit as well as Stephen, how do you account for the radically different response to Jesus? What is needed in your life besides knowledge to fully understand Messiah? In what ways do people hold on to religious rituals and heroes today, while missing the whole point of what those ceremonies and people represent? How does this tendency affect you? In what ways could the charges that Stephen makes against the Jewish leadership be made against you? How might you be feeling “stiff-necked” this week? How will you begin to bow to YHVH in that area now? Would you say that the TaNaKh is more like a stranger or a close friend to you? When Yeshua was brought to trial, He was basically quiet before the Great Sanhedrin; yet Stephen spoke very boldly here. How do you decide when to speak boldly and when to be quiet before your opposition?

This passage marks a transition in the book of Acts. Up to this point, Peter has been the dominating figure, fulfilling his calling by taking the gospel to the Jews first (Romans 1:16). But another major figure looms on the horizon: Rabbi Sha’ul, who is also called Paul (to see link click Bm – Paul’s First Missionary Journey), who is introduced at the end of Chapter 7. Bridging the gap between those two giants is Stephen. Peter ministered primarily to the Jewish people, and Paul primarily to the Gentiles. Peter ministered in Yerushalayim, Paul throughout the Roman Empire. But Stephen’s ministry was the catalyst that catapulted the Messianic community out of Judea, Samaria, to the ends of the earth (1:8).¹³⁷

As Chapter 7 opens, Stephen’s trial begins. While the main thrust of Stephen’s speech was to answer the charges of blasphemy, three other ideas are interwoven throughout. First, he knew he must capture and hold his audience’s attention. He did that by reciting Isra’el’s history as the groundwork for his defense. Since the Sanhedrin was fiercely proud of their ancestry that was a topic they never got tired of hearing about.

Secondly, Stephen’s speech was to indict his hearers for rejecting the Messiah. Throughout his speech, that indictment slowly builds until it reaches a devastating climax (see An – Peter Speaks to the Shavu’ot Crowd: Speeches in Acts). He shows them that by rejecting the Messiah, they were imitating their apostate descendants, who rejected Joseph, Moshe, and even God Himself. Stephen was not the blasphemer, they were!

Thirdly, Stephen sought to present to them Yeshua as the Messiah, using Joseph and Moshe as types of Christ. This passage presents Stephen’s fourfold defense against the false charges of blasphemy brought against him. It is best not to get lost in the details of the references in the TaNaKh that Stephen cites, but instead, to concentrate on the dramatic themes and flow of his masterful message. Stephen’s purpose was not to recite history, but to establish that he was not guilty of blaspheming ADONAI, Moshe, the Torah, or the Temple. His accusers were, however, guilty of blasphemy because they had rejected the Messiah.¹³⁸

Whatever the Jewish leaders thought, they must have been surprised at what they got next. Stephen stood accused. His life literally hung in the balance. But instead of placating his accusers or defending himself, Stephen preached one of the most classic sermons in history.¹³⁹

ADONAI

Now Stephen addressed the most serious allegation first, accusing him of blasphemy against ADONAI. Being filled with the Spirit of God, Stephen was full of grace and power, was continually doing great signs and wonders among the people. The more Stephen poured out his life for Messiah, the more Messiah poured His life into Stephen. It is important to understand that his authority to perform great signs and wonders only came after he was appointed one of the seven deacons (see Av – Deacons Anointed for Service); in other words, it came only with the authority given to him by the apostles by the laying on of hands. This process will continue throughout the book of Acts. The ability to perform signs and wonders was not common among all the believers, but were only performed either by the apostles or those to whom they delegated, as was the case of Stephen. The Messianic community was not a miracle-working community. Rather, it was a Messianic community with miracle-working apostles.

But some men from what was called the Synagogue of the Freedmen – both Cyrenians and Alexandrians, as well as some from Cilicia and the province of Asia – were stirred to action and began arguing with Stephen that Yeshua was the Messiah (6:8-9). These men were probably Diaspora Jews who had been captured and enslaved by the Romans. General Pompey, who captured Jerusalem in 63 BC took a number of Jews prisoner and released them in Rome. Some, however may have been Gentile converts to Judaism. The phenomenon of proselyte zeal is familiar in all religious communities. But they could not withstand the wisdom and the Ruach by whom he was speaking (6:10). When Stephen’s opponents could not get the best of him in a fair debate, they changed tactics.

Then, with evil intent, they secretly instigated men into saying: We have heard him speaking blasphemous words against Moses and against God. This was the same tactic used at Messiah’s trial (Mattityahu 26:59-61; Mark 14:55-59). Even the trumped-up charges of blasphemy and speaking against the Temple were the same as those against the Lord. The fact that they also charged Stephen of blaspheming Moshe suggests he was denying the ability of the Torah to save. They charged him of blaspheming against God by speaking against the Temple by saying you could worship God anywhere. That accusation no doubt reflected Stephen’s presentation of Messiah as the embodiment of ADONAI. But that charge of blasphemy violated the laws of the Sanhedrin (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lh – The Laws of the Great Sanhedrin Regarding Trials), because the Oral Law said that unless someone specifically pronounced the personal name of God – YHVH – they could not be accused of blasphemy. Since those same lies had worked so well against Yeshua, they were quick to use them against Stephen.

They also incited the people, members of the Sanhedrin, the elders, and the Torah scholars; and they rushed at Stephen as a mob, seized him, and forcefully led him away to the Sanhedrin. They set up two or three false witnesses who said: This man never stops speaking words against this Holy Place (which would appeal to the Sadducees) and the Torah (which would appeal to the Pharisees). For we have heard him saying that this Yeshua ha-Natzrati will destroy this place (once again angering the Sadducees) and change the customs that Moses handed down to us (once again angering the Pharisees), so they both had a reason to be angry against Stephen (6:11-14). By changing the customs, they meant disregarding the Oral Law (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ei – The Oral Law). Because the rabbis taught that Moshe brought down the Oral Law from Mt Sinai at the same time, he brought down the Ten Commandments, an attack on the Oral Law was, in effect, tantamount to an attack on the Torah as a whole. Stephen had the utmost respect for Moshe and the Torah. Their choice of words, however, made him out to be a revolutionary, seeking to overthrow the established divine order. They turned his positive proclamation into a negative attack.

What happened next presented a striking contrast. Stephen stood before the Sanhedrin accused of being an evil blasphemer of ADONAI, Moshe, the Torah and the Temple. However, watching him intently, everyone who was sitting in the Sanhedrin saw that his face was like the face of an angel (6:15). Far from being evil, Stephen radiated the holiness and Sh’khinah glory of God, something no one else in history had experienced except for Moshe (Exodus 34:27-35). By putting His Sh’khinah on Stephen’s face, ADONAI showed His approval of the B’rit Chadashah and its messenger.¹⁴⁰

The Pharisees instigated this third persecution of believers in Acts. It was no longer merely the Sadducees who were in opposition to the Messianic Community as had been during the first five chapters because the issue now being raised is no longer merely about the resurrection. The issue now is a new order, a new Way in opposition to Pharisaic Judaism.¹⁴¹

Having been charged, Stephen had the right to defend himself, therefore, a the cohen gadol (probably Caiaphas, who was in office until 36 AD) said: Are these things so (7:1)? In effect, he was asking, “How do you plead to the charges against you, guilty or not guilty?” But Stephen’s defense was hardly a defense in the sense of an explanation trying to win an acquittal. Rather, it was a proclamation of the Good News and an indictment of the Jewish leaders for their failure to recognize Yeshua as the Messiah, or to appreciate the salvation offered by Him.¹⁴²

As Stephen begins his defense, critics of the inerrancy of the Scriptures, or opponents of messianic Judaism, like to point to several quotes from Acts 7 as proof texts. They try to show a sharp contradiction of what it says in the TaNaKh and Acts 7. They quote from Acts 7, and then they say, “Where in the TaNaKh does it say this?” There are two reasons for these seeming discrepancies: First, is the use of different texts. The TaNaKh that we now have is called the Masoretic Text. It is the oldest complete copy that we have of the TaNaKh compiled about 1,250 AD. Being a Hellenist, when Stephen quotes the TaNaKh he uses the Septuagint, or the Greek translation of the TaNaKh, compiled about 250 BC. The Hebrew text, which is the basis of the Septuagint is at least as old as that. However, the Masoretic Text only dates to 1,250 AD. So the question becomes, “Which text is more accurate? The Hebrew text behind the Septuagint, or the Masoretic Text?” If we go by what is closest to the original time of writing, the Septuagint is using a Hebrew text that is far older than the Masoretic Text. So one reason the verses in the Acts 7 don’t match the quotes in the TaNaKh is that Stephen used the Septuagint.

Second, is the use of a principal called telescoping, or combining two events into one picture. Critics say that Acts 7 gets confused between the stories of Abraham and Jacob, of Jacob and Joseph. But Stephen was under pressure, in the middle of a mob mentality, they were gnashing their teeth at him and he could not go into a verse-by-verse teaching with the 71 members of the Sanhedrin. So he telescoped them.¹⁴³

Then Stephen began the longest speech in Acts, and he declared: Brothers, showing his solidarity with them, and fathers (not an uncommon name for the members of the Sanhedrin), showing his respect for them as leaders of the Jewish people, listen. Wasting no time in preliminaries, he plunged directly into his subject. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, or Ur of the Chaldees (Genesis 15:7), before he lived in Haran (see the commentary on Genesis Dq – Terah Became the Father of Abram, Nahor and Haran). The point Stephen was trying to make here was that the divine Presence was not restricted to the land of Isra’el or the Temple because the Sh’khinah glory appeared long before there was a Tabernacle or a Temple, even before Abraham crossed over into the borders of the Promised Land. As a Diaspora Jew, he understood certain things that the native-born Jews did not.

Stephen repeated the content of the covenant and the call of Abraham, saying: Leave your country and your relatives, and come here to the land that I will show you (7:2-3). The context of what he is speaking about is Genesis 11:31 through 12:3. He also telescopes the events of Genesis 15:7. The first stage was that Abraham left the land of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran. From there, after his father died, God moved him to this Land where you now live. This divine command was, in fact, spoken in Haran. Since, however, it is clear from Genesis 15:7 that God called Abraham out of Ur, it can be reasonably assumed that the divine call came to him there before he lived in Haran. It would be natural to assume that the content of the divine message given at Ur was the same as that given in Haran, and hence, there is no need to speak of Stephen being in error.¹⁴⁴

As Paul would do later (Romans 4 and Galatians 3), Stephen focused on Abraham as a man of faith. Completely obeying God’s sovereign call and left his homeland, not knowing exactly where he was going. Even after arriving in his new country God gave him no inheritance in it – not even a foothold – yet He promised “to give it to him as a possession to him and to his descendants after him,” even though he had no child (7:4-5). The closest Abraham came to seeing such a grand promise fulfilled was the birth of Isaac. What he did receive was a promise of Egyptian bondage.

But God spoke in this way, that his “descendants would be foreigners in a land belonging to others, and they would enslave and mistreat them for four hundred years (a rounded number for the sake of brevity, once again he was under a lot of pressure). But I will judge the nation they serve as slaves, God said: and afterward they shall come out and serve Me in this place (7:6-7). Luke quotes the TaNaKh almost always in a form either corresponding to the LXX or close to it, and not according to the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Here Genesis 15:13-14 is quoted close but not exactly corresponding to the LXX.¹⁴⁵

Following the flow of salvation history, Stephen moved into the patriarchal period. Then God gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision. So he became the father of Isaac and circumcised him on the eighth day, and so Isaac with Jacob, and Jacob with the twelve patriarchs, the heads of the twelve tribes of Isra’el. For the sake of brevity, Stephen chose to bypass the stories of Isaac and Jacob and move directly to Joseph. The patriarchs became jealous of Joseph and sold him into Egypt. Yet God was with him. He rescued him out of all his troubles and granted him favor and wisdom before Pharaoh, king of Egypt, who made him governor over Egypt and all his household (7:8-10). Joseph’s revelation also came to him outside the Promised Land.

Stephen makes it extremely clear that the twelve patriarchs were guilty of opposing God and His purpose. They sold Joseph, but God rescued him. The nation’s rebellion against ADONAI began with the patriarchs themselves. The Sanhedrin was doing the very same thing that the founding fathers of the nation were guilty of doing and what they were falsely accusing Stephen of doing. Although he waits until the conclusion of his speech to openly declare that Yeshua is the Messiah, even in his historical summary, Stephen gives snap-shots of Messiah. There are eighty ways that the life of Joseph prepares us for, or foreshadows, the life of Christ (see the commentary on Genesis Iw – The Written Account of the Generation of Jacob).¹⁴⁶

“Famine and great suffering came over all Egypt and Canaan, and our fathers could find no food. But when Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent our fathers there the first time. On the second visit, Joseph made himself known to his brothers, and his family became known to Pharaoh. The one rejected by his brothers became the savior. The point Stephen was making, was that this was also true of the Messiah. So Joseph sent and called for Jacob and all his relatives – seventy-five persons (see the commentary on Genesis Km – Jacob’s Genealogy). Genesis 46:26-27; Exodus 1:5 and Deut 10:22 all say that seventy people went down to Egypt. However, the Septuagint text of Genesis 46:27 reads seventy-five. Stephen, being a Hellenist, would naturally have used the Septuagint figure. The larger figure was apparently arrived at by including the total of Joseph’s descendants born in Egypt. Jacob went down to Egypt and died, he and our fathers. They were carried to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham had bought for a sum of money from the sons of Hamor in Shechem (7:11-16). Again, for the sake of brevity, Stephen telescopes the accounts of Abraham’s purchase of the Machpelah site and Jacob’s acquisition of the Shechem site. His purpose was not to recite history, but to establish that he was not guilty of blaspheming ADONAI.¹⁴⁷

Moshe

Having successfully defended himself against the charge of blaspheming ADONAI, Stephen then moved to the second accusation, rejecting Moshe. But as the time drew near for God to fulfill His promise to Abraham, the people increased and multiplied in Egypt – until “there arose another king over Egypt who did not acknowledge (Hebrew: yada, which can be translated acknowledge) Joseph (Exodus 1:8).” Dealing with our people with cruel cunning, this king mistreated our fathers and forced them to abandon their infants so they would not survive. At this time Moses was born. The details of Moshe’s life and ministry were well known to the Sanhedrin, so Stephen merely summarized them to make his point. Sensitive to the accusation that he blasphemed Moshe, Stephen makes the point of praising him, describing him as extraordinary before God. For three months he was nurtured in his father’s house. And when he was set outside, Pharaoh’s daughter took him and raised him as her own son (see the commentary on Exodus Ak – A Man of the House of Levi Married a Levite Woman). Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was powerful in his words and deeds (7:17-22). Moshe was a remarkable man. His natural leadership abilities, coupled with the most comprehensive education in the ancient world, made him uniquely qualified for the task that was ahead of him.

God’s call came when he was approaching forty years of age. At that time, it came into his heart to visit his brothers, Bnei-Yisrael. Although raised in Pharaoh’s household, Moshe had never forgotten his people. No doubt his mother instilled in him during the years ADONAI had providentially arranged that she serve as his nurse, that he was a Hebrew. So when he approached forty, he decided to help his long-suffering people. When he saw one of them being treated unjustly, he went to the defense of the oppressed man and avenged him by striking down the Egyptian. By taking that murderous action, he was assuming that his brothers understood that by his hand God was delivering them, but they did not understand and did not recognize him as the deliverer. The point Stephen was making was that the same thing would happen to the Messiah. So on the next day he appeared to them as they were fighting. He tried to reconcile them in shalom, saying: Men, you are brothers. Why do you wrong one another? But the one doing wrong to his neighbor pushed him away, saying ominously: Who appointed you ruler and judge over us? You don’t want to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday, do you (Exodus 2:14). Realizing the killing of the Egyptian had become widely known Moses fled and became an exile in the land of Midian (see the commentary on Exodus Al – Moses Fled From Pharaoh and Went to Live in Midian), where he became the father of two sons, Gershom and Eliezer (7:23-29). No doubt viewing him as the leader of a Jewish rebellion, Pharaoh sought to unsuccessfully kill him (Exodus 2:15).

When forty years had passed (see the commentary on Exodus Am – Moses in Moses), and the time had come for Moshe to lead the Israelites to the Promised Land, the Angel of ADONAI appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai in the flame of a burning bush (see the commentary on Exodus Aq – Flames of fire from within a Burning Bush). Once again, Stephen’s point is that God revealed Himself outside of the Promised Land. When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight. But when he came up to look, there came the voice of Adonai: “I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob.” Moses trembled in fear and did not dare to look. But Adonai said to him, “Take the sandals off your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy ground (even though it was outside of the “Holy Land”). So anywhere that God appears is an area of holiness. God’s blessings were not limited to the Holy Land or to the Temple. I have surely seen the oppression of My people in Egypt and have heard their groaning, and I have come down to deliver them. Now come – let Me send you to Egypt” (7:30-34).

Then Stephen reached the climax of his defense of blaspheming Moshe. This Moses – whom they rejected, saying: Who appointed you as ruler and judge? – is the one whom God sent as both ruler and redeemer, by the hand of the Angel of ADONAI who appeared to him in the bush (7:35). You will notice in the next several verses that Stephen keeps emphasizing the word this. This Moses, or this man (meaning Moses), because Stephen wanted to drive the same point home over and over again. The very same person that Isra’el rejected, was the one same person that God used to bring Isra’el out of bondage. This is a constant pattern in Isra’el’s history – spiritual pride coupled with spiritual ignorance (which is a real bad combination) causes them to reject the deliverers God sends them. It has sometimes been pointed out that Yeshua could not have been the Anointed One, or else Isra’el would have recognized Him. But as Stephen points out, they rejected both Joseph and Moses. This was the typical response to those God sent to deliver them. Yeshua spoke of this attitude in Matthew 21:33-46.

Moshe accomplished his mission and led them out of Egypt. But Isra’el’s further rebellion against God and Moses, in spite of the wonders and signs they had already seen in the land of Egypt and in the parting of the Sea of Reeds and in the wilderness, caused them another delay. Because of that rebellion, they wandered outside the Promised Land for forty more years. It was obvious from Stephen’s speech that he had the utmost respect for Moses and the charge of blaspheming Moshe was as false as that of blaspheming ADONAI. The Jewish response to Moses, like their response to Joseph, paralleled their response to Messiah. Then Stephen reminded them that Moshe, in the well-known passage from Deuteronomy 18:15, predicted Messiah would come, prophesying: God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your brothers (7:36-37). Thus, they were doing again what their fathers had done – rejecting the God-sent deliverer. Only this time it was more serious than all the others combined. This was the Messiah they were rejecting.¹⁴⁸

Torah

It was an easy transition from Moshe to the Torah, since the two are so closely related. While Moses was with the community in the wilderness, he received the Torah from angels who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and was with our fathers. He received living words of the Torah to pass on to us (7:38). Stephen affirmed the Torah again, making a “not guilty” plea. He declared that ADONAI was the author of the Torah, that the angels were its mediator Acts 7:53; Galatians 3:19; Hebrews 2:2), and Moses was the recipient. That certainly was not blasphemy, and the Sanhedrin knew it.

But now comes the turning point. Stephen commented how the original recipients of the Torah had failed to keep it. Our fathers, he reminded them, did not want to be obedient to him. It was not Stephen who disobeyed the Torah, but the very fathers that the Sanhedrin revered. Stephen did not reject Moshe, but those same fathers shoved him and the Torah aside and in their hearts they turned back to Egypt. Worse still, while Moses was on Mount Sinai receiving the Torah from God, the people turned to idolatry, saying to Aaron, “Make gods for us who will go before us. For this Moses who led us out of the land of Egypt – we have no idea what has happened to him.” Right from the moment when the Torah was given, they rebelled against it. For all their declarations of loyalty to the Torah and the Temple, and their accusations against Stephen, his hearers belonged to a nation, which right from the start, had rejected the Torah and the true worship of YHVH.

With this thought the speech takes a new turn, and down to verse 50 it is concerned with the twin themes of idolatry and Temple-worship in Isra’el. And they made a calf in those days, offered a sacrifice to the idol, and they kept on rejoicing in the works of their hands. That single act of idolatry, led to other acts of idolatry in the wilderness. So in the next two verses Stephen deals with Isra’el’s long history of idolatry throughout those forty years and beyond. Ha’Shem’s response was to give them up to idolatry. So in these two verses Stephen summarizes the remainder of Isra’el’s history and tendency toward idolatry that brought on the Babylonian Captivity (see the commentary on Jeremiah Gu – Seventy Years of Imperial Babylonian Rule).

So God turned and gave them over to serve the host of heaven, or star worship, just as it is written in the book of the Prophets (7:39-42a), that is, the book of the twelve minor prophets, regarded as a single book in the TaNaKh. To prove his point, Stephen quotes the book of Amos.

It was not to Me that you brought sacrifices and offerings, but to idols,
for forty years in the wilderness, was it, O House of Isra’el (7:42b LXX)?
You also took up the tent of Moloch, the Ammonite star god, connected to the planet Venus and similar to the Greek goddess Venus, to whom human sacrifices were offered,
and the star of your god Rephan, a Babylonian god associated with the planet Saturn, the images you made to worship. The sacrifices Isra’el offered were the Levitical sacrifices God commanded, but they diverted their sacrifices to these gods. The point Stephen was making was that the idolatry that began with the golden calf, ended up with the worship of the host of heaven, the stars. This is verified throughout the Scriptures (Deuteronomy 17:3; Second Kings 17:6, 21:3 and 5, 23:5; Second Chronicles 23:3 and 5; Jeremiah 13:15).
And I will deport you beyond Babylon’ (7:43 LXX). His point is that the prophets had already accused Isra’el idolatry, therefore his accusation was nothing new.

Luke quotes the TaNaKh almost always in a form either corresponding to the LXX or close to it, and not according to the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Here Amos 5:25-27 is quoted close but not exactly corresponding to the LXX.¹⁴⁹

Temple

In response to the accusation that he spoke against the Temple, Stephen traced its history to show his great respect for it because YHVH ordained it. Our fathers had the Tent of Witness (the Tabernacle) in the wilderness, but this also was outside the Promised Land. Furthermore, just as the One speaking to Moses had directed him to make it according to the design he had seen. The wilderness generation could not plead ignorance of God’s glory, since the Tabernacle was in their midst. Nor could the later fathers who, having received it in turn and brought it in with Joshua when they took possession of the land of the nations that God drove out before our fathers. From the time of the conquest until the days of David, Isra’el had the Tabernacle, a constant symbol of God’s holy presence. Yet they persisted in falling into idolatry. After Ha’Shem gave David victory over all his enemies, he asked to find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob (Psalm 132:3-5 LXX). David’s request was denied, however, and it was Solomon who built a house for Him (7:44-47). Stephen makes only a brief reference to Solomon’s Temple, since the Sanhedrin was very familiar with its history. Moreover, the current Temple was not Solomon’s, which had been destroyed by the Babylonians. The current Temple had been built by the non-Jew Herod. So the transitory nature of the Tabernacle, and then the Temple lead to Stephen’s main point, namely that Elyon does not dwell in man-made houses. There can be no doubt that the Sh’khinah glory abided within the most holy place of the Tabernacle and later the Temple, but still did not limit Him in any way.

In contrast to this view Stephen stresses that ADONAI did not currently reside in the Tziyon Temple, God dwells in heaven, and furthermore, not only is God and God’s true dwelling not made with human hands, instead all the world and all that is in it is God-made. Nothing is wrong with the Temple nor with building it, but it is wrong to believe that it (and perhaps it alone) is God’s dwelling place. Furthermore, allegiance to a Temple built with human hands could place Isra’el in danger of repeating its earlier wilderness sin, for the golden calf had also been made by human hands.¹⁵⁰ As the prophet says (7:48):

‘Heaven is My throne,
and the earth is the footstool of My feet.
What kind of house will you build for Me, says Adonai,
or what is the place of My rest (7:49)?
Did not My Hand make all these things’ (7:50)?

Luke quotes the TaNaKh almost always in a form either corresponding to the LXX or close to it, and not according to the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Here Isaiah 66:1-1 is quoted verbatim from the LXX with a change in the word order.¹⁵¹ Stephen was not guilty of blaspheming the Temple. They were, for confining Ha’Shem to it. Instead, with Isaiah, he argued that God was greater than any Temple. It was the symbol of God’s presence; not the prison of His essence.

Throughout Stephen’s speech the tension must have been building. As he pointed out Isra’el’s rejections and apostasies, the Sanhedrin grew increasingly uneasy. They must have wondered what point was he trying to make? They didn’t have to wait long. Having laid the historical foundation for it, he hit them with a devastating indictment: They were just like their fathers in the days of Joseph, Moses and David. They were stiff-necked, or obstinate, people (7:51a)! Because they prided themselves on their physical circumcision and ritual behavior. Stephen’s description of them as uncircumcised of heart (Leviticus 26:41; Deuteronomy 10:16, 30:6; Jeremiah 4:4, 9:26; Ezeki’el 44:7 and 9) and ears (Jeremiah 6:10) was very pointed! Their sin had never been forgiven. They were as unclean before God as uncircumcised Gentiles. That was the ultimate condemnation.

These are the TaNaKh’s characterization of Isra’el: God’s people outwardly bear the sign of the covenant with Abraham, but inwardly are impure and rebellious (Romans 2:17-3:2). You always resist the Ruach ha-Kodesh; just as your fathers did (Isaiah 63:10), you do as well. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? They killed the ones who foretold the coming of the Righteous One. Yeshua made the same accusation (Matthew 23:29-36). Now you have become His betrayers and murderers, not directly, as they were about to do with Stephen, but through Pontius Pilate and the Roman government.¹⁵²  You who received the Torah by direction of angels and did not keep it (7:51b-53)! They were without excuse, since the Torah pointed to Messiah (John 5:39). Stephen once again echoes the words of his Lord, who said to those same leaders: If you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about me (John 5:39). There was no offer of salvation, only a declaration of disobedience.

Despite their proud boast that if we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets (Matthew 23:30), they had done far worse. Their fathers had murdered God’s prophets, they, however, had murdered His Son, the Righteous One. Now they were about to commit yet another murder. Stephen would shortly become another in the long line of ADONAI’s messengers killed by God’s chosen nation, and the first killed for preaching the name of Messiah.¹⁵³

Deacons Anointed for Service
6: 1-7

31-33 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

Deacons are appointed DIG: Given what the Bible says in Acts 2:44-45 and 4:32, how could the widows be overlooked in the daily support? How do the apostles resolve this problem? Why would the Messianic community choose seven Greek speaking Jews to fill this ministry? Looking at 6:7, 5:42, 4:32-35, and 2:42-47, how would you sum up what has happened in the book of Acts so far? How does that relate to 1:8?

REFLECT: What secondary issues prevent your place of worship from fulfilling Acts 1:8? What are the dangers of putting people who are not spiritually minded in places of leadership? What principles here might help free it for its real mission? You don’t have to be a deacon or deaconess to serve others. How can you serve others this week?

In the book of Acts, the Adversary’s attacks on the Messianic Community have come on several different fronts. The devil tried to corrupt Messiah’s Community from within (to see link click At – Ananias and Sapphira Lie to the Ruach), and he attempted direct opposition and intimidation (see Au – The Apostles are Persecuted). But these strategies had failed. Therefore, the ruler of demons (Matthew 12:24) now tries to “divide and conquer” by raising one group in the Community against another.

The problem: Now in those days, following the second persecution of Chapter 5, when the disciples (the early name for believers) were multiplying because of the teaching and preaching about Messiah, grumbling arose among the Hellenists against the Hebrews. The Hebrews were those Jews more inclined to embrace the Jewish culture and were mostly from Judea. The Hellenists were those Jews more inclined to embrace the Greek culture and were mostly from the Diaspora (all over the Roman Empire). For the most part, the Hebrews tended to regard the Hellenists as unspiritual compromisers with the Greek culture, and the Hellenists regarded the Hebrews as “holier-than-thou” traditionalists. There was already a natural suspicion between the two groups, and the Adversary tried to take advantage of that standing suspicion.¹²⁸

A problem arose because the Hellenists’ [Greek speaking] widows were being overlooked in the daily support from the common fund (6:1). Apparently, some of the Hellenistic Jews believed that the widows among the Hebrew Jews were receiving better care. This didn’t mean that the oversight was deliberate. It was more a problem of very rapid growth and poor supervision. Although widows always received special protection under the Torah (Deuteronomy 14:29, 24:19, 26:12), they were often ignored under Pharisaic rule (Mark 12:38-40). But the Messianic Community in Jerusalem had a special concern for the welfare of their widows (James 1:27).

The early Messianic community took its responsibility to help support the widows seriously. The basic biblical definition of a widow doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with her marital status, but a woman who no longer has any means of support, and is therefore in need of special protection (First Kings 17:12). Many well-known biblical women – such as Ruth, Orpah, Naomi, Abigal, and Bathsheba – are never referred to as widows because they presumably possessed some source of income. Therefore, a woman became a widow only if and when she had no one obligated to support her. The case of Tamar suggests that being sheltered within Onan’s house prevented her from being called a widow. She was only called a widow after she left her Judah’s house (Genesis 38:11).¹²⁹

A closer look at the Hellenists: Here Luke introduces a mysterious group of people called Hellenists. This terminology is found again in (9:29, and possibly also in 11:20). Since the term Hellenist (Greek: elleniston meaning, a Greek-speaking Jew, that is, one who can speak Greek only and not Hebrew or Aramaic) is not found in any literature prior to Acts, one must rely on the context of the term to help us understand what Luke means. If one takes all the clues that Luke gives in Acts Chapters 6 through 11, it appears that he uses the term “Hellenist” to refer Diaspora Jews or their descendants who have migrated back into the land, living in or around Jerusalem whose primary language was Greek and who attended synagogues where they worshiped in Greek (such as the Synagogue of the Freedmen in 6:9). Without minimizing the differences that existed between the Hebrews and the Hellenists in regard to the care of their widows, which was essentially a practical matter, it must be said that there is nothing here that suggests a significant doctrinal rift between the two groups of believers.¹³⁰

The solution: So, the Twelve, functioning as the elders in the Messianic congregation, called together the whole group of the disciples and said: It is not right for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve (Greek: diakonos, meaning to deconize) tables (6:2). Great respect was accorded to the Sages who belonged to the “holy brotherhood” and divided their day into three parts – a third for Torah, a third for prayer, and a third for mitzvot, or good deeds (Eccl.R. 9.9.1). In this context, the apostles wanted to devote most of their time within their two-thirds of Torah-study and prayer rather than with practical issues that legitimately lay within the duties of the disciples. This didn’t mean that the apostles considered ministry to the widows beneath them, they just didn’t have the time to do it properly. This reminds us of Moshe’s selection of capable men to assist him in judging the people (see the commentary on Exodus Cy – Moses Chose Capable Men From All Isra’el). They needed people to serve tables, but there were qualifications to meet.

They wisely delegated these responsibilities. So, brothers, select from among you seven reputable men, full of the Spirit and wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this duty (6:3). The number seven and the candidates qualifications parallel the committee of seven “best men of the city, or administrators” who represented and governed the city’s affairs. As rulers, let each city have seven men long showing integrity and the pursuit of justice (Josephus Antiquities 4.214).¹³¹ They asked the disciples to nominate the men, they wisely wanted the congregations input, but the final decision actually rested with the apostles.

Nowhere in this chapter of Acts are these men called deacons, but later when the Messianic Community grew, and Gentiles entered the Church these men were called deacons (diakonos in Greek or shammash in Hebrew) as seen in First Timothy 3:8, and in the same way, their wives also served as deaconesses (First Timothy 3:11 NIV), like Phoebe, a deaconess (diakonos in Greek) of Messiah’s community at Cenchrea (Romans 16:1). The word deacon simply means servant, and those men were certainly servants. They could claim the promise for faithful service that Paul specifically makes to the deacons in First Timothy 3:13, “For those who have served well as deacons (Greek: diakonos) gain for themselves a good standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Messiah Yeshua.

But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the service of the Word, which are actually inseparable (6:4). Messianic rabbis, pastors, and teachers of the Word must permeate their teaching and preaching in prayer or their messages will be superficial and dry. They must pray constantly that their people will apply the truths they reveal to them. The men and women of ADONAI must also pray that they would be a pure channel through which God’s truth can flow.

The greatest proclaimer of God’s Word who ever lived, Paul, was a man devoted to prayer. He assured the church in Rome that for God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the Good News of His Son. How unceasingly I make mention of you, always pleading in my prayers (Romans 1:9-10a). He told the church in Ephesus: I never stop giving thanks for you as I mention you in my prayers (Ephesians 1:16). To the church in Philippi he wrote: I thank my God at every memory of you, always praying with joy in every prayer of mine for you all (Philippians 1:3-4). Paul also prayed constantly for the Colossian church: For this reason also, ever since we heard about you, we have not stopped praying for you. We keep asking God that you might be filled with the knowledge of His will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding (Colossians 1:9).

Paul also served as a great model of the commitment to the Word. In his farewell speech to the Ephesian elders, he said: You yourselves know how I have behaved among you all the time from the first day I set foot in Asia, serving the Lord with all humility and tears and trials which fell upon me through the plots of the Jewish leaders. I did not shrink back from proclaiming to you anything that was profitable, teaching you publicly as well as from house to house, testifying to both Jewish and Greek people repentance to God and trust in our Lord Yeshua (20:18-21).

Acts 19:9-10 describes Paul’s ministry at Ephesus: Paul went into the synagogue and for three months spoke boldly, debating and persuading them about the kingdom of God. But when they were hardening and refusing to believe, speaking evil of the Way before the whole group, Paul withdrew from them, taking the disciples with him, debating daily in the hall of Tyrannus. This continued for two years, so that all the residents of Asia heard the word of the Lord – Jewish as well as Greek people. Imprisoned in Rome, people came to him at his quarters in large numbers. From morning until evening he explained everything to them, testifying about the kingdom of God, trying to persuade them about Yeshua from the Torah of Moshe and the Prophets (Acts 28:23).¹³²

The statement that the apostles would devote themselves to prayer and to the service of the Word pleased the whole group; and they chose Stephen (Greek: Stephanos meaning crown), a man full of faith and controlled by the Ruach ha-Kodesh, and Philip the evangelist (Chapter 8). Nothing definite is known about the remaining five men: Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch, all Diaspora Jews so they could not be charged with favoritism against the Greek widows (6:5). Once again, we see Luke’s literary skills as he subtly introduces two major figures, Stephen and Philip, both of whom will soon figure in a significant way in the story just as he had done earlier with Barnabas (4:36), and will soon do with Sha’ul (7:58). An abundance of evidence exists regarding Jerusalem residents who immigrated from the Diaspora (2:5). On the basis of the number of Greek-inscribed tombstones discovered, the number of Greek-speaking residents of the City is estimated to have been between ten to twenty percent of the total population.

We should count it as a privilege to serve the Lord in these basic, practical ways, instead of seeing it as a burden. You don’t have to be a deacon or deaconess to serve others, and you should never use that as an excuse. Apart from the cross, Jesus showed the ultimate measure of love by merely washing His apostles feet (John 13:1-5).

The apostles first act was to pray. They placed these men before them; and after praying, they laid hands (Hebrew: s’mikhah) on them, conferring the duties and privileges of their office in the traditional Jewish manner (6:6). The practice of laying on hands originally was part of the ritual for sacrifices brought to the Tabernacle, and later the Temple (Leviticus 1:4, 3:3, 4:15 and 8:14ff). The Oral Law interpreted the biblical text to mean that the individual was required to press both hands down with all of his or her strength on the head of the animal to be offered (Betza 2:4, Men. 9:7ff, Temple 3:4, Kel. 1:8, Meg. 16b). In its basic form, the rite appears to have represented a pouring of one’s own being into another. In the Second Temple period, the practice developed into a means of rabbinic ordination.¹³³

The principle: A vital principle is illustrated in this incident that is of urgent importance to Messianic congregations and churches today. It is that ADONAI calls all His people to ministry, that He calls different people to different ministries, and that those called to prayer and the ministry of the word must never allow themselves to be distracted from their priorities.¹³⁴

This is a transition statement that provides reasonable clues to the development of Luke’s material that follows, which are the beginnings of the Messianic Community in Yerushalayim. The result: Because the situation was handled with wisdom and sensitivity to those who were offended, a potentially divisive issue was defused, and the gospel continued to go forth. The word of God kept on spreading, and the number of disciples in Jerusalem greatly multiplied (6:7a). The two verbs spreading and multiplied are in the imperfect tense, meaning that the spreading of the word and the growth of the Community were continuous. The devil’s strategy failed. He tried to divide the Messianic congregation, and it didn’t work. But the devil’s second strategy also failed. The apostles were not distracted from the focus of ministry ADONAI had for them.¹³⁵

Even a great number of the cohanim were becoming obedient to the faith (6:7b). Although most of the cohanim are presented in the B’rit Chadashah as being opposed to Yeshua, this was not true of all. There were holy men in the priesthood such as Zechariah the father of John the Immerser (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ao – The Birth of John the Baptist). There is a theory that the cohanim who came to believe in Yeshua were not part of the establishment but those who had become disenchanted with it and had gone off to join the Essenes in Qumran. The reasoning is that the theology of the Dead Sea Scrolls is much closer to the New Covenant than that of the Pharisees who controlled the Jerusalem priesthood. But that theory lacks evidence from the B’rit Chadashah to support it. Moreover, since the activity of the messianic believers had not yet spread to other parts of the Land, it seems more likely that the cohanim becoming obedient to the faith at that time were those who made it their business to be in Yerushalayim, rather than retreat to the desert. For God even can reach the hearts of people whose ties and associations might be expected to lead them to oppose Messiah. When we come to 15:5 we are informed of believing cohanim.¹³⁶

The Apostles are Persecuted
5: 17-42

31-33 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

The apostles are persecuted DIG: How do you account for the jealousy of the Sadducees? What did they accuse the apostles of in verse 28? Is this any different than what they had said in 4:2? How could they miss the impact of those miracles? What things in Peter’s response (5:29-32) would arouse their fury? Why is Peter being so direct (4:1-12, 5:19-20)? Prior to Jesus, there were many Jewish zealots who led rebellions against Rome. What is Gamaliel’s point in recalling such leaders? What was his motivation? Do you think Peter’s statement in 5:29 and 4:19 may have influenced Gamaliel? Why did Gamaliel adopt a “wait-and-see” attitude? Flogging sometimes resulted in death (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Lr – The Soldiers Mock Jesus). How do you think the apostles felt when given this sentence? What does the actual response of the apostles show about them in verses 41-42?

REFLECT: What is the ultimate authority in your life? When does this create problems for you? What can you do to overcome these problems? How do you think you would feel if you were sent to jail for what you believe? How would your family feel? What would this do for you? How does joy in suffering relate to your ultimate authority? How have you experienced God setting your free to honor Him more fully? How do you explain why YHVH sometimes delivers you out of hardships, but at other times He allows you to go through them? Who are some of the people that have had the greatest influence on your life, and what do you most respect about them? Name one or two of the best pieces of godly advice you’ve ever received. What had God enabled you to do (or protected you from doing) as a result of knowing and applying this?

The conflict between the righteous Messianic community and the Sanhedrin (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Ei – The Great Sanhedrin) steadily intensified. With the growing success of the righteous of the TaNaKh, there is a heightened response on the part of the Jewish authorities. At first, the Council only heard, warned and released Peter and John (see Ar – Peter and John Stand before the Sanhedrin), but now, they were ready to impose the death penalty (5:33), and were only thwarted in their bloodthirsty intentions by the sage advice of a Pharisee (5:34-39). The apostles were again released, but this time the Council had them flogged before doing so (5:40). The conflict would become even stronger with the stoning of Stephen (6:8 to 8:2), and the resulting persecution of the Hellenistic Jews, driving them out of Yerushalayim (8:1).

The arrest: The second persecution of the Messianic community is once again initiated by the Sadducees. While the Pharisees led the opposition to Yeshua in the gospels, the Sadducees were the chief opponents of the early Messianic community.¹¹⁶ Caiaphas was appointed high priest by the Romans and acted as the president of the Sanhedrin, but his father-in-law Annas was the real power behind the scenes (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Li – Annas Questions Jesus). Caiaphas, the kohen gadol, rose up, and all those with him, and they were filled with religious zeal (Greek: zelos). Their leadership was in a fragile state, religiously and politically, since there was also the danger that the turmoil created in the City would cause the Romans to take action. Compelled by the seriousness of the situation, they grabbed [all] the apostles and put them in a public jail (5:17-18). 

The imprisonment: But during the night an angel of Adonai opened the prison doors, and leading them out, saying: Go, take a stand in the Temple and speak to the people the whole message about this Life (5:19-20). Perhaps there is a bit of irony here because the Sadducees did not believe in angels. This is the first of several angelic interventions in the book of Acts (8:26, 12:7-10 and 23). The message the apostles were to preach was the gospel that leads to Life, the life of the resurrected Messiah (Philippians 2:16; First John 1:1-4), the very thing that the Sadducees denied. They were not only set free, they were set free with a purpose. Now when the apostles heard that, they entered the Temple at daybreak, when the crowds would be gathering to observe the morning sacrifice, and began teaching (5:21a). The apostles obviously were not concerned for their safety since they returned to the very spot where they had been arrested.¹¹⁷ At the same time that Peter and the apostles began preaching in Solomon’s Colonnade, the Sanhedrin began to assemble.

Now the scene shifts to the Council chambers where the Sanhedrin had gathered for its morning session. The first item on their agenda was the interrogation of the apostles. When Caiaphas, the kohen gadol and those with him arrived, they called together the Sanhedrin, (Luke gives the Sanhedrin the full weight of its title here) even the council of elders of Beni-Yisrael (5:21b). At the time of Herod Agrippa most members of the Sanhedrin were Sadducees. Therefore, in suppressing the gospel, the Sanhedrin would use two Sadducee criteria. First, the apostles proclaimed the resurrection of the Messiah, which the Sadducees denied. And secondly, they proclaimed “another king,” the Kosher King, Yeshua (17:7), which, if true (compare John 18:33-38), would be politically subversive, as well as destructive of the cozy working relationship that the Sadducees had with the occupying Romans.¹¹⁸

They sent the Temple guard to the prison to have the prisoners brought in. But when they arrived, they did not find them in the prison. So, they hastily returned with the humiliating news, saying: We found the prison locked with maximum security and the guards standing at the doors; but when we opened up, we found no one inside (5:21c-23). The Council was at a loss for words.

Not surprisingly, when the captain of the Temple guard and the ruling kohanim heard these words, they were perplexed about them, wondering where this would lead. How far is this going to spread? But, finally, someone came and reported to them, “The men you put in prison are standing in the Temple and teaching the people!” Then the captain of the Temple guard, the sagan, decided he had better handle this matter personally. After all, he was second in rank to Caiaphas himself and ultimately responsible for order on the Temple grounds. An unusual circumstance like this had best not be left to lesser officials.¹¹⁹ So, he went off with the officers and brought back all the apostles – but not with force. By now the members of the Council were anxious to resort to the most drastic measures in dealing with the apostles since they feared they might be stoned because the apostles had such a good reputation among the people (5:24-26). One should not miss the irony of this entire fiasco and should praise God who is greater than even the top ruling legislative body of government and had already planned protection for His apostles.

The interrogation: The scene shifts again, this time to the Royal Stoa, where the Sanhedrin met. This second appearance before the Council was drastically different from the first (see Ar – Peter and John Stand before the Sanhedrin). That one only involved two apostles. Here, [all] the apostles stood before the Ruling Council. When they had brought them in, the apostles stood (Greek: estesan) before the Sanhedrin. This was the usual procedure, the defendants standing and the judges sitting. Then Caiaphas, the kohen gadol, began the interrogation by saying: We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name (still refusing to say the name of Yeshua) and look, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching (5:27-28a). This time, formal charges were made.

Not only had the apostles filled Jerusalem with their teaching, Caiaphas exclaimed, “but you intend to bring on us the blood of this Man” (5:28b)! This was a very serious charge. It was an expression for the charge of murder and demanded the death (Greek: diacherizo meaning to put to death with one’s own hands) of the guilty party. It was as if Caiaphas was saying, “You are trying to get us killed for being responsible for this man’s death.” Far from backing off, Peter intensified his accusation. He had previously said that the Jewish authorities were responsible for Yeshua’s death (2:23-24 and 36, 3:13-15, 4:8-12, 7:51-53, 13:27-29, 23:6-9, 24:1 and verses 29ff). Now he insisted that they were as guilty as if they had killed Him with their own hands. ¹²⁰

What Jewish leadership was denying, however, was exactly what they once claimed. When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere trying to free Yeshua from certain death, he declared to the Jews, “I am innocent of this man’s blood. It is your responsibility” (Matthew 27:24)! In response, all the people (including the Jewish leadership) answered, “Let His blood be on us and on our children” (Mattityahu 27:25)! Caiahpas and the other Sadducees clearly understood the point. Yeshua was really the Messiah and they were guilty of shedding His blood. As the interrogation progressed suddenly the tables were turned, the apostles became the judges and the Council became the accused.¹²¹

The response: However, Peter was not trying to get the Council killed, but rather to get them saved. As with the first trial, his response was more of a witness than a defense. Peter and the apostles reminded Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin that they would continue preaching in the name of Jesus. “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you decide; for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard” (4:19-20). And the Sanhedrin should have realized that when the apostles were released the first time, they had no choice but to continue preaching in the name of Yeshua. Now Peter reminded them, “We must obey God rather than men (5:29).” It was a moral necessity to disobey the orders of the Sanhedrin because their orders violated an eternal principle. Believers are to be in subjection to the governing authorities (Romans 13:1-7; First Peter 2:13-17), but when the civil government asks us to violate the clear teachings of Scripture, the obligation of the believer is disobedience because we are responsible to a higher authority.

Peter and the apostles did not deny the charges, in fact, they go out of their way to affirm the charges against them. The God of our fathers raised up Yeshua, whom you seized and had crucified. So Peter charges the Sanhedrin with murdering the Messiah, and murdering Him in the worst way, hanging on a tree, literally the Greek word for wood (Deuteronomy 21:22-23; Galatians 3:13). But in contrast to murdering Him, ADONAI lifted Him up. Here Peter offered salvation to the very people who had crucified Jesus; the apostles use the opportunity provided in court to preach the gospel to their very accusers and judges.¹²² This One God exalted at His right hand as the Author of life (3:15) and Savior, (Psalm 27:1; 26:1 LXX) to give repentance to Isra’el and removal of sins (see the commentary on Revelation Ev – The Basis for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ). And we are witnesses of these events – as is the Ruach ha-Kodesh, whom God has given to those who obey Him by faith (5:30-32). Those were harsh words for the rulers of Isra’el, and they responded accordingly.

There are only three possible responses to convicting preaching: violent hostility, tolerant indecision, or saving acceptance. This passage illustrates them all.

Violent hostility: The Jewish leaders were not the least bit interested in Peter’s appeal. Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart (Greek: dieprionto meaning sawn in two) and wanted to kill them (5:33). When Peter said these very same words to the Jews at Shavu’ot (see An – Peter Speaks to the Shavu’ot Crowd), the result was conviction. But here, the result was rage. They were so enraged they wanted to kill them, just like they had done with Jesus, without following their own set of rules (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lh – The Laws of the Great Sanhedrin Regarding Trials). But there was a problem. Disobedience to a command of the Sanhedrin did not demand the death penalty. They were turning into a mob, as we will see in the stoning of Stephen in Chapter 7. But where no one would intercede for Stephen; however, the apostles found some assistance from an unusual source.

Tolerant indecision: Therefore, a certain Pharisee named Gamaliel, a premier teacher of Torah (Greek: nomo didaskalos, meaning an expert in Torah and who gave expert theological opinions and interpret Torah in accordance with the Oral Law. It was these Doctors of Torah that Yeshua was interacting with when He was twelve years old). In Jewish writings he is called Rabban (our master), which is a higher title than rabbi (my teacher). He was a disciple and grandson of rabbi Hillel, and at that time Gamaliel was the leader of the school of Hillel (more liberal), in opposition to the school of Shammai (more conservative). In the history of Judaism, only seven rabbis have had the title of Rabban, and Gamaliel was the first of these seven. He was the teacher of Sha’ul (22:3). Historically, as long as he was in charge there was a great deal of respect for the Torah, but things changed when he died. The rabbis teach that since Rabban the elder died, there has been no more reverence for the Torah. Gamaliel, who was respected by all, stood up in the Sanhedrin and took over the interrogation of Peter. He obviously commanded sufficient authority to order the apostles out of the chamber for a little while (5:34), especially since the Pharisees were in the minority of the Council.  

Then he addressed the Sanhedrin with the standard greeting: Men of Isra’el, then proceeded to make his case: Be careful what you are about to do with these men and don’t take any rash actions. But what was his motive for intervening? The Pharisees were the main leaders in the opposition against Messiah, and while at this time the main opposition to the apostles, the Pharisees would only join them in their opposition to Stephen. But at this point, the Pharisees, led by Gamaliel were moving slower. Furthermore, the Sadducees instigated this action against the apostles primarily because they got mad about the preaching of the resurrection, which the Pharisees affirmed. Therefore, the Pharisees, although few in number, were not about to join the Sadducees because of an issue in which they already disagreed. Last but not least, Gamaliel was a Pharisee and was not about to let the Sadducees lead on this issue, nor was he going to follow their lead.

To make his point, Gamaliel cited two examples of messianic pretenders in recent Jewish history. For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody; and a number of men, maybe four hundred, joined up with him. He was killed, and all who followed him were scattered and came to nothing. After this fellow, Judah the Galilean rose up in the days of the census of Caesar Augustus (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Aq – The Birth of Jesus) and got people to follow him. He also perished, and all who followed him were scattered (5:35-37). Within the first century, there were no fewer than ten messianic pretenders. These Jewish claimants gathered large numbers of followers with promises of physical redemption and deliverance. Disappointment, sorrow, and sometimes, total destruction followed. Having given those two accounts for the reason to move cautiously, Gamaliel then gave his advice.

Outside of the New Covenant records we learn of Simon of East Jordan who crowned himself king. He burned the royal house in Jericho and the homes of the rich, before dying in combat. Another Messianic claimant, “the wonder working Bedouin,” promised the people liberty if they would follow him to the desert, but he too was slain.

One of the most prominent pretenders arose in 132 AD, with a mission to overthrow the Roman yoke and regain Israel’s sovereignty over the land lost to the Romans in 70 AD. The reasons for the revolt centered on the Roman edict outlawing circumcision, the construction of a new city on top of the ruins of Jerusalem called Aelia Capitolina, and the erection of the temple Jupiter on the Temple Mount.    Akiba, the foremost rabbinic leader of the day, dubbed Bar Kochba the Messiah. Bar Kochba means “son of a star” and some saw him prophetically in Numbers 24:17: “A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will arise out of Israel.” However, his real name appeared to be Bar Kosiba, which means “son of a liar.” Bar Kochba was a physically strong man who became arrogant in his quest to overthrow the Roman yoke and regain the land. On the battlefield he reputedly prayed: “Please help our enemies. As for us we do not need any help.” He had some success for about three years; and there were even coins minted in two of those years which characterized the land as independent Israel. But Bar Kochba was ultimately defeated at Betar; he and as many as 580,000 Jews were slain by the Romans during the uprising. Many others were taken as slaves and marched to Rome. Rabbi Akiva was captured and held in prison for two years before being martyred. When asked why his facial countenance was so bright while walking to his inevitable fate, he said: “Why should I not rejoice. I am about to see the King.” With the Shema on his lips he passed away.

All these pretenders came to naught, and yet the bulk of the Jews missed the authentic Messiah Yeshua, who came preaching love and mercy, and sought to establish the Kingdom through spiritual and nonviolent measures. His apostles turned the world upside down through their witness. It took a Jewish learned rabbi, Gamaliel, the Paul’s mentor, who, concerning Yeshua’s apostles, said: So now I tell you, stay away from these men and leave them alone. For if this plan or undertaking is of men, it will come to an end like Theudas and Judah of Galilee; but if it is of God, you will not be able to stop them. You might even be found fighting against God (5:38-39). Gamaliel merely voiced a sound rabbinic principle, “Any assembling together that is for the sake of Heaven shall in the end be established, but any that is not for the sake of Heaven shall not in the end be established (M. Abot 4:11). Some have wondered how Luke could have known what was said within the Council walls. But there were those who became believers in their midst that day. Nicodemus (John 7:50-52, 19:38-42), Joseph of Arimathea (Matthew 27:57-60), and lest we not forget, Gamaliel’s star pupil Sha’ul of Tarsus (22:3) was either present on this occasion or heard a detailed account from Gamaliel himself about it later. Luke, then, could have gotten the information from Paul.¹²³

The Holy Spirit here is not making a theological statement of truth, but merely quoting what Gamaliel said at that time. It was merely his opinion, and it was a wrong opinion. There are religions that have endured, like Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Hinduism, Buddhism and Christian Science, none of which are of God, but look how long they’ve lasted. Gamaliel was wrong and we shouldn’t follow his advice.

Yeshua made it clear that it is impossible to be neutral about Him and His message: Whoever is not with Me is against Me, and whoever does not gather with Me scatters (Matthew 18:30). Moreover, the members of the Council knew the words of Elijah, “how long will you waver between two opinions” (First Kings 18:21)? There are times when being neutral means making a passive (and perhaps cowardly) decision to reject Messiah’s offer of eternal life (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ms – The Eternal Security of the Believer). It is significant that the first group named among those who will be thrown into the lake that burns with fire and brimstone (which is the second death) are the cowardly (Revelation 21:8).¹²⁴

However, the Great Sanhedrin agreed with Gamaliel’s advice to go slow and not kill the apostles like the Sadducees wanted to do. Then they called in the apostles and had them flogged (Deuteronomy 25:2-3). The sages reduced the number of lashes from forty to thirty-nine as a fence against exceeding forty by mistake, and instituted a physical examination to verify that the person would not die even from that number (Mak. 3:10-11).¹²⁵ Consequently, the flogging was no trivial matter. It was meant to be a serious lesson to offenders. This was the first time that the apostles suffered physically for their faith. It would not be the last. Not willing to take the radical step of handing the apostles over to the Romans, the Sanhedrin ordered them not to continue speaking in the name of Yeshua, and let them go (5:40). But whatever flogging or shameful treatment the Great Sanhedrin gave them, it did absolutely no good. The apostles didn’t stop preaching for a moment (and neither should we)!

Saving acceptance: From the apostles perspective, the fact that they were being persecuted was proof that they were serving God. So, they left the presence of the Sanhedrin, rejoicing that they were considered worthy to be dishonored on account of His Name (Matthew 5:10-12; Luke 6:22-23). For this reason God highly exalted Him the Name that is above every name, that at the name of Yeshua every knee should bow, in heaven and on the earth and under the earth, and every tongue profess that Yeshua that Messiah is Lord – to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:9-11). And every day, in the Temple and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming Yeshua as the Messiah (5:41-42).

The great preacher, Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892), spoke of this kind of bold heart, “Now, I charge every Christian here to be speaking boldly in Christ’s name, according as you have the opportunity; and especially to take care of this tendency of our flesh to be afraid; which leads practically to get us off easily and to save ourselves from trouble. But do not fear – be brave for Christ. Live bravely for Him who died so lovingly for you.”¹²⁶

Lord, Your Word says: Knowledge inflates with pride, but love builds up. If anyone thinks he knows anything, he does not yet know it as he ought to know it. But if anyone loves God, he is known by Him (First Corinthians 8:1-3). May I not justify Your Word to learn things and accumulate insights, but rather to know You and increase my love for You. I want the full benefit of what Your Word can teach me. May nothing – may nothing – be wasted.¹²⁷

Ananias and Sapphira Lie to the Ruach
5: 1-16

31-33 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

Ananias and Sapphira lie to the Ruach DIG: Were Ananias and Sapphira required to sell the land and lay all the money at the apostles’ feet? Why or why not? What was their sin? What would Ananias and Sapphira gain by lying about the money they received? How is your answer related to 4:32-37? Given that we are all sinners (Romans 3:23), why do you think Ha’Shem punished Ananias and Sapphira so severely? How might that great fear be useful to God at that time? How did this incident lead to the response of the people in verses 13 and 14?

REFLECT: When have you tried to “fool” God? What happened? How have you experienced the fear of the Lord? How has that influenced your life?

Divine punishment has to be more severe at the beginning of a new Dispensation.

The god of this world (Second Corinthians 4:4) had failed miserably in his attempt to silence the witness of the Messianic community. However, the enemy of souls never gives up; he simply changes his strategy. His first approach had been to attack the community from the outside, hoping arrests and threats would frighten the leaders. When that failed, the Adversary decided to attack the community from the inside and use people who were a part of that fellowship. We must face the fact that Satan is a clever foe. If he does not succeed as the devouring lion (First Peter 5:8), then he attacks again as the deceiving serpent or an angel of light (Second Corinthians 11:3 and 13-14). The devil is both a murderer and a liar (John 8:44), and believers of every age must be prepared for both attacks.¹⁰⁰

Scene One: If Barnabas was a positive example of the communities sharing, the story of Ananias and Sapphira provides a sharp contrast. After they saw the great generosity of Barnabas and how well he was respected, Ananias and Sapphira decided they wanted some of the same respect. In order to gain a reputation to which they had no right, they told a brazen lie. Their motive in giving was not to relieve the poor, but to fatten their own ego. Their great sin was rooted in pride. It also was an expression of the couples’ inability or unwillingness to love ADONAI your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength (Deuteronomy 6:5).¹⁰¹

Therefore, a man named Ananias, a Hellenized version of the Hebrew name Hananiah meaning God has shown favor (a very common name in the Second Temple period), together with his wife, Sapphira a Hellenized version of the Hebrew name Shfirah meaning beautiful (is found almost exclusively among the rich in Jerusalem), sold a property (5:1-2a). Taking the lead, he kept back some of the proceeds. The word kept back (Greek: enosphisato) is the same word in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the TaNaKh) when Achan kept back some of the things that were cherem, or devoted to destruction in Joshua 7:1. It means to steal (Titus 2:10). So, Achan was to Joshua, Ananias and Sapphira were to the Messianic community. And just as the deceit of Achan interrupted the plan of God under the leadership of Joshua, the deceit of Ananias and Sapphira interrupted the plan of God under the leadership of the apostles.

Ananias kept back some of the proceeds with his wife’s full knowledge. Clearly, both husband and wife were involved with the deception together. But Ananias took the lead, and when it came time to give something, he went alone and brought part of it and set it at the feet of the apostles (5:2b). He was expecting praise and respect for his generous gift, but instead he was rebuked.

The spirit of Ananias is alive and well in our Messianic congregations and churches today. Far too many want to be considered “spiritual” while refusing to pay any kind of price in their service to ADONAI.¹⁰²

Scene Two: ADONAI clearly gave Peter the gift of discernment (First Corinthians 2:14 and 12:10), and just as the Spirit of God inspired Elisha to see his servants dishonesty in accepting money from Naaman the leper (Second Kings 5:26), Peter knew that Ananias’ gesture was a lie. He said: Ananias, why has Satan (the only reference to the Adversary in the book of Acts) filled your heart to lie to the Ruach Ha’Kodesh and keep back part of the proceeds of the land (5:3)? The Serpent had filled the heart of Ananias just as he had filled the heart of Judas (Luke 22:5).

While it remained unsold, it was your own, wasn’t it? There was no obligation to sell it. And after it was sold, wasn’t it at your disposal? Peter freely acknowledges that the land and its value belonged to Ananias alone. He was completely free to do whatever he wanted. His sin was not withholding the money, but once pledged it became a totally different matter. The biblical principle in regard to voluntary offerings clearly states: When you make a vow to ADONAI your God, you are not to delay to make good on it – for ADONAI your God will certainly require it of you, and you would have in on you. But if you refrain from making a vow, you would not have sin on you. Whatever comes out of your mouth, you are to take care to do, since you have vowed to ADONAI your God a freewill offering that you have promised with your mouth (Deuteronomy 23:22-24). Thus, Peter asked rhetorically: How did this deed get into your heart? Satan didn’t make him do it; he chose to do it because of his pride. The devil can influence the life of a believer, but he can’t do your sinning for you. Ananias had to conceive it in his heart.¹⁰³ You haven’t lied to men but to God (5:4). We must keep in mind that their sin was not in robbing God of money, but in lying to Him and robbing Him of His glory. The lust for recognition was conceived in their hearts, and when that sin was fully grown, it gave birth to death (James 1:15). It is important, however, to remember that Ananias was guilty of being prideful and lying, not blasphemy.

Once again, the Bible declares that the Ruach is God, not merely some form of electricity like the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach. In verse 3 the Bible says Ananias lied to the Ruach, and in verse 4 the Bible says Ananias lied to God. Therefore, the Ruach is God.

Scene Three: As soon as he heard these words, Ananias fell down and breathed his last (Greek: ekpsucho) (5:5a). Peter was speechless. Peter didn’t pronounce a death sentence on Ananias, he simply confronted him with his sin. Peter was probably more surprised than anyone when Ananias fell down dead. The severity and quickness of Ananias’ fate reminds us that God sees the heart. Another sudden judgement of death occurred when Uzza attempted to steady the Ark of the Covenant (see the commentary on the Life of David, to see link click Cr – The Ark Brought to Yerushalayim). In both cases something new and very honoring to ADONAI was being done for the first time. Both times it was pride that brought the death. Uzza’s pride was in his careless and irreverent attempting to do a special work of God his own way. If he had sought God ‘s way, Uzza would have been full of reverence for the ark and had it carried by men on its poles, as Ha’Shem had instructed in His Word. Then by following God’s Word, no one would have died. Carelessness in doing God’s work by one’s own thoughts is also pride. There was Great fear came upon all who heard about it. The young men got up and wrapped him in a shroud, then carried him out and buried him (5:5b-6). It was usual in Palestine to bury a corpse on the day of death. The heat, doubtless, had much to do with this custom; but in addition, as far as the Jews were concerned, the Torah made anyone unclean for seven days if they touched a dead body, or who was even in a house where a dead body lay (Numbers 19: 11 and 14).¹⁰⁴ So, burials were often fairly hasty in Palestine, but not this hasty, not, that is, except for death under unusual circumstances, such as suicides and criminals – and judgments from Ha’Shem (Deuteronomy 21:22-23).¹⁰⁵

As much as anything, the lesson of Ananias and Sapphira is that we presume greatly on YHVH when we assume that there is always time to repent, time to get right with God, time to be honest with Him. Any such time given by God is an undeserved gift that He owes no one, we should never assume it will always be there.¹⁰⁶

After an interval of about three hours after the burial of Ananias, his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. Peter responded to her, “Tell me if you sold the land for this much.” With this question, Peter is giving her an opportunity to repent. But she said, “Yes, for that much.” She confirmed her guilt by continuing the lie. Then Peter said to her, “How did you agree to test the Ruach ADONAI? This same word to test (Greek: peirazo) is used in the Septuagint to describe the Israelites testing God in the wilderness (see the commentary on Exodus Cu – Strike the Rock and Water Will Come Out of It). Stephen likewise indicts the Israelites for being stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears . . . always resisting the Spirit of God (7:51).

This was a sin against the Spirit of the LORD. Look, the feet of those who buried your husband are at the door – they will carry you out too!” Immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last (Greek: ekpsucho). One can scarcely miss the irony of the situation. Now she lay at Peter’s feet, on top of her money. When the young men came back in, they found her dead and carried her out and buried her beside her husband (5:7-10). She joined him in the conspiracy and she would join him in the grave.¹⁰⁷ Sapphira was a knowing and willing participant in the sin, as well as the blatant cover-up. Ha’Shem’s judgment of her was just as righteous as it was with her husband. We must keep in mind that their sin was not in robbing God of money, but in lying to Him and robbing Him of His glory. The lust for recognition was conceived in their hearts, and that sin was fully grown, it gave birth to death (James 1:15). Thus, the purity of the early Messianic Community was preserved. As Moshe had said: You are to purge the evil from your midst (Deuteronomy 17:7 and 12).

Ananias and Sapphira’s deaths fall under the category of (Hebrew: karet), being cut off from the Jewish people. It could include excommunication or, in this case, death at the hands of heaven. This suggests that Luke intended to present the incident as a personal punishment, although naturally one from which the whole Community – and those outside it – could learn. Significantly, the breathed his/her last (Greek: ekpsucho) is only found here in Acts and in 12:23 where we see Agrippa’s unnatural death.¹⁰⁸

Married couples in the Lord have a responsibility to keep each other from sin, and to refuse to participate in sin together, for God will hold each accountable. The concept of submission (Ephesians 5:21-28) does not extend to submitting any sin. Ultimately, the husband is responsible for what goes on in the marriage (see the commentary on Genesis Bf – Your Desire Will Be for Your Husband and He Will Rule Over You).¹⁰⁹

Some have questioned whether or not Ananias and Sapphira were true believers. It is best to see them as genuine believers for several reasons. First, they were included in the whole group of those who believed (4:32). Secondly, they were involved with the Ruach ha-Kodesh, thus pointing to a relationship with Him. Third, if they were not believers, what lesson about sin did this give to teach all the rest who were true believers? Fourth, the Adversary can become personally involved with believers (Matthew 16:21-23; Ephesians 6:12; First Peter 5:8-9). Finally, death can be divine chastening for a believer (First Corinthians 11:30-32; First John 5:16).¹¹⁰

Scene Four: And great fear came over the whole Community and all who heard these things (5:11). The clear indication is that Peter, and apparently the rest of the apostles, were regarded as possessing rare powers in exposing sins and, perhaps, being the direct agents of divine punishment. But some have wondered why the punishment had to be so harsh. Believers would commit worse sins later and didn’t die. If you trace the Scriptures through the various Dispensations, divine punishment has to be more severe at the beginning of a new Dispensation. This was a crucial time for the early Messianic Community, and such impurity, sin, scandal and satanic infiltration could have corrupted the entire community at its root.¹¹¹ Take, for example, Nadab and Abihu, the two sons of Aaron in Leviticus 10:1-2 at the beginning of the Dispensation of Torah. They burned the incense in an improper manner and God killed them right in the holy place. Later, worse sins were done in the Temple, but the punishment was not as severe because Ha’Shem is always harsher at the beginning of a new Dispensation.¹¹² It is certainly true that the account of Ananias and Sapphira introduces us to a different world of thought from that of today. It is a world in which sin was taken seriously.¹¹³

For the first time the word community (Greek: ekklesian, meaning the body of believers whom God calls out from the world and into His eternal Kingdom) is mentioned. Out of a total of twenty-three times this word is found in the book of Acts, this is the first appearance. The Septuagint uses ekklesian to translate the Hebrew word qahal, meaning the congregation of Isra’el. And everywhere the Hebrew word qahal is found in the TaNaKh, the Septuagint uses ekklesian except in the books of Jeremiah and Ezeki’el, where the Greek word used to translate qahal is sunagoge, from which we get the word synagogue.

What we have here is the example of Peter using his authority as an apostle. In Matthew 16:19b, ADONAI gave Peter the authority to bind and to loose, “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven” (Mattityahu 16:19b). The perfect tense is used here, meaning that whatever is already God’s decision in heaven will be revealed to the apostles on earth. It literally says: Whatever you prohibit on earth will have already been prohibited in heaven. The terms binding and loosing were common in the rabbinic writing of that day. From the Jewish frame of reference, the terms binding and loosing were used by the rabbis in two ways: judicially and legislatively. Judicially, to bind meant to punish, and to loose meant to release from punishment. Legislatively, to bind meant to forbid something, and to loose meant to permit it. In fact, the Pharisees claimed binding and loosing for themselves, but God really never gave it to them. At that time, Jesus gave this special authority to Peter alone. After His resurrection Christ gave the unique authority to bind and loose in legislative matters and in judicial punishment to the other apostles. Once they died, however, that authority died with them.

The apostles exercised this authority legislatively to permit and forbid. And we can see Peter exercising judicial authority here in Acts 5 where Peter bound Ananias and Sapphira for punishment because they lied to the Ruach Ha’Kodesh. As a result, Peter bound them for punishment using his authority as an emissary, and they were killed.

Today many people take this concept of binding and loosing out of context and talk about binding and loosing demons. First, we are told to resist, not bind, the devil and he will flee from you (James 4:7). There is no suggestion in the Scriptures that we should bind the Destroyer of souls. Even Michael was told not to enter into spiritual battle with Satan. Jude reminds us: But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not dare to bring a slanderous accusation against him but said, “The Lord rebuke you” (Jude 9)! Theoretically, even if we could bind the Adversary it seems that somebody keeps on letting him loose after he is bound! I don’t know about your neighborhood, but in mine, the deceiver is pretty active. No, the context here is not satanic activity, but apostolic authority.¹¹⁴

After the example of Ananias and Sapphira we find that Paul confronted, or forbid, Judaizers from attacking believers in the Church (Galatians 1:1 to 2:21); and Paul and Barnabas confronted, or forbid, a group of Judaizers from imposing all of the 613 commandments in the Torah as being obligatory on believers at the council at Jerusalem (Acts 15:1-21).

Below is a summary statement that prepares us for what is to follow. These summary statements in Acts can be seen in four places (2:43-47, 4:32-37; here and 8:1b-4). It is important to distinguish between summary statements and transition statements; the former only occur in the first eight chapters of Acts, and the latter occur in various places throughout the book.

Meanwhile, from time to time through the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were happening among the people. Once again, the signs and wonders were limited to the apostles (2:43, 4:22 and 30). And because there were so many believers at that time, they met all together in Solomon’s Colonnade.  That way many could hear what the apostles were teaching and preaching. But the Jewish population in general dared not join them. For they feared persecution from outside the Messianic community, and, because of Ananias and Sapphira, feared discipline from within, though the people continued to think highly of them. Yet more than ever those trusting in the Lord were continually added – large numbers of men and women. They even carried the sick into the streets and laid them on stretchers and cots, so that when Peter passed by at least his shadow might fall on some of them. So, while all the apostles were given the ability to perform signs and wonders, Peter was especially anointed in that gift. Crowds were also gathering from the towns around Jerusalem, continually bringing those who were sick or tormented by unclean spirits, and they were all being healed (5:12-16).¹¹⁵

Ruach-Filled Community Life
4: 32-37

31-33 AD

Ruach-filled community life DIG: How did persecution affect the early Messianic community? Was this the beginning of communism? Compare verses 32-35 here with 2:42-47. What qualities mark this first Messianic community? Why did the apostles change the name of Joseph? And why did Luke mention Barnabas in his description of the life of the Community?

REFLECT: If you were to describe your Messianic congregation or church, which of the phrases here could you use to do so? Which ones would not fit now? How well does verse 32 fit your relationship with others in your place of worship? What would have to change for such sharing to be more possible?

This is a summary statement that prepares us for what is to follow. These summary statements in Acts can be seen in four places (2:43-47, here; 5:12-16 and 8:1b-4). It is important to distinguish between summary statements and transition statements; the former only occur in the first eight chapters of Acts, and the latter occur in various places throughout the book.

The Messianic community started out with about one-hundred-twenty in the upper room (1:15), then about three thousand souls were added at Shavu’ot (2:41), and the number of men (not counting the women) who came to the Lord was about five thousand as a result of Peter’s preaching on Solomon’s Colonnade (4:4). Therefore, Messiah’s community had grown in a very short period of time to approximately thirteen thousand people.

Now the whole group of those who believed was one in heart and mind. Because of their unity, they regarded people more important than things.⁹⁴ No one would say anything he owned was his own, but they had everything in common (4:32). They recognized God’s ownership of everything; it all belonged to God and His people. As stated earlier (to see link click Ao – The New Covenant Community Begins), we shouldn’t regard this as “early communism,” because it was voluntary (5:4), temporary, and flawed. The voluntary sharing of property to meet the physical needs of others is not communism. Communism says, “What’s yours is mine.” However, the Messianic community said, “What’s mine is yours.” This was the logical extension of the practice of fellowship with one another.⁹⁵

With great power of miracles, the apostles were giving witness to the resurrection of the Lord Yeshua. This was the major emphasis of apostolic teaching. Although they knew that it greatly offended the Jewish authorities, the apostles never suppressed the truth to avoid that offense. Once again, the only people who had the power to perform miracles were the apostolic representative of Jesus Christ, or people delegated by the apostles themselves (see Av – Deacons Appointed for Service). This was not a miracle producing congregation, but a congregation with miracle working apostles. And ADONAI’s grace, His abundant unmerited favor was upon them all (4:33). 

No one among them was needy, for all who were owners of lands or houses would sell them (also see James 2:15-16; First John 3:17). The Greek here doesn’t mean that everyone sold their property at once. Rather, from time-to-time this was done as the Lord brought needs to their attention. The imperfect tense of the verbs indicates continuing action. At no point did they pool all their possessions. This shows that they put God first, people second, and things a distant third. This giving was absolutely necessary to meet the needs of this rapidly growing community. Remember, many of these baby believers came as pilgrims from abroad, having responded to the gospel at Shavu’ot (see An – Peter Speaks to the Shavu’ot Crowd). Unfortunately, this generosity was soon abused.⁹⁶

They brought the proceeds and set them at the feet of the apostles. This was a clear indication of apostolic authority, and full control of the distribution of all proceeds. And the proceeds were distributed according to the need each one had and the conscience of the donor (4:34-35). This action was taken to some degree as a result of their understanding of the Second Coming. The rabbis taught that when the Messiah came, the messianic Kingdom would begin. Hence, there was a real belief that the Kingdom was just around the corner, therefore, they didn’t feel the need to hold on to their land and would sell it to help those in need within the Messianic community. It is important to realize that this practice of distribution was limited to Messiah’s community in Yerushalayim and you never see other Messianic congregations in the book of Acts following this practice. This practice may have been a factor in eventually contributing to the Messianic community in Jerusalem to become poverty-stricken needed support from the Gentile churches that Paul had started (Acts 11:27-30, 24:17; Romans 15:25-27; Galatians 2:10).

Though the Jerusalem Messianic community became poor enough to need Gentile support- they became a rich church for their giving brought them eternal rewards! God, who always knows the future and cares for tenderly for His children, knew how their giving so generously would be taxing on their community, and God planned in advance to have the Gentile churches help them in their financial need. In doing this, God blessed both the Jerusalem Messianic community and also the Gentiles who gave, for it is more blessed to Gove than to receive (Acts 20:35). This was a historical event and no theology should be derived from it.

Of course, many societies have dreamed of the ending of poverty. The Greeks, for example, looked back to a golden age in which all property was public, and Pythagoras is said to have practiced it with his disciples, and to have coined the epigram “among friends everything is common” (Greek: koina). Plato later incorporated this ideal in his vision of a utopian republic. Then Josephus wrote that the Essenes, whom we know as the Qumran community, lived the same kind of life as do those whom the Greeks call Pythagoreans. Yet, the inspiration for the common life and love of Messiah’s community in Jerusalem can neither from Pythagoras, nor from Plato, nor from the Essenes, but from the Torah, as illumined by Yeshua. For the Torah was quite clear on the matter: There should be no poor among you (Deuteronomy 15:4).⁹⁷

Luke concluded his treatment of the early Messianic congregations’ sharing with two specific examples – one to be followed, Barnabas, and one to be avoided, Ananias and Sapphira (see At – Ananias and Sapphira Lie to the Ruach).⁹⁸ Now Joseph, was also called Barnabas by the apostles (which is translated Son of Encouragement). The apostles renamed him Barnabas because of his spiritual gift of exhortation. He was a Levite and a native of Cyrus (4:36). We know some other things from other passages. His name appears twenty-four times in the book of Acts, and five times in Paul’s letters (First Corinthians 9:6; Galatians 2:1, 9 and 13; Colossians 4:10). He was the cousin of John Mark, who wrote the gospel of Mark (Ephesians 4:10). We also know that he had a commanding appearance (14:12), fully controlled by the Ruach Ha’Kodesh (11:24). When Paul returned to Jerusalem after his salvation, no one trusted him. But Barnabas persuaded the Messianic community in Yerushalayim to believe his story (9:27). Later, Messiah’s community in Tziyon would send Barnabas to investigate Gentile salvation in Antioch (11:19-24). Still later, he would go and get Paul from Tarsus to help in the ministry of Antioch (11:25-26). He would be Paul’s companion for the first missionary journey (see Bm – Paul’s First Missionary Journey). At the conclusion of that journey, Barnabas and Paul represented the Antioch church at the crucial Jerusalem council (Acts 15). Sadly, his close association with Paul ended in the dispute over taking John Mark on the second missionary journey (see Bu – Paul’s Second Missionary Journey)

Barnabas was also an apostle (14:14). He was of that second group of apostles. The first group of the Twelve had to be a witness of John’s immersion of Messiah to His ascension. However, the second group of the apostles only had to see the resurrected Christ, and Barnabas, like Paul, was in that second group.

Barnabas owned a field (presumably in Cyprus), but he sold it and brought the money and laid it at the feet of the apostles (4:37). The singling out of Barnabas also implies that the selling was voluntary. If it were compulsory there would have been nothing noteworthy about his actions. Barnabas was a Levite, and under the dispensation of Torah (see the commentary on Exodus Da – The Dispensation of Torah), the Levites were not permitted to own any land (Numbers 18:20 and 23; Deuteronomy 10:9). But after the Babylonian Captivity (see the commentary on Jeremiah Gu – Seventy Years of Imperial Babylonian Rule), that commandment no longer applied because the Jews were not resettled in their original tribal divisions. Here we see Luke’s superior writing skills as he quietly introduces Barnabas into the storyline as an important figure in the book of Acts.

A closer look at the social status and level of the earliest believers: It is fair to say that Luke only really presents us with sufficient detail in the descriptions of the Messianic community of Jerusalem and perhaps the church at Antioch to get any kind of clear picture of how things were in Acts. However, Luke gives us four clues to the social level and status of the earliest believers.

First, there is education. We have already learned that Peter and John were laymen without any rabbinic training, and that their powers of persuasion were inspired by the Ruach ha-Kodesh rather than learned. We learn nothing in Acts 1-8 to contradict this assessment of at least the Galilean male leadership. There is, however, some evidence that there might have been a few female followers of Yeshua, such as Joanna, the wife of Kuza, Herod’s finance minister who may have been of higher education and social status (Luke 8:3), and Luke locates them in Jerusalem during the events of Shavu’ot (Luke 23:55; 24:10) and probably afterward as well (Acts 1:14). One may also rightly point to Mary, the mother of John Mark, as a person of higher status who had a large enough home to allow various early believers to meet there, and had at least one domestic servant, but probably more (Acts 12:12-13). Mark himself was able to write his gospel in Greek, which reflects a more than basic education in and knowledge of Greek.

Second, is the whole issue of housing and hospitality. As seen above, the early church was dependent on the hospitality and the houses of members, presumably the more well-to-do believers, in order to provide a place to meet. For example, the apostles met in an “upper room” that was apparently not an unusual location for early Jews to gather to eat and study Torah. The implication of the fact that believers met in homes in Jerusalem is to suggest, especially in view of the growing number of converts, that at least several believers had large enough homes to accommodate a good number of people, but that no one locale was sufficient to house them all, even very shortly after Shavu’ot. This suggests that there were a few early Jewish believers who were of some social status.

Third, is what is actually said about money and finances in Acts 1-8. We have already seen various hints that at least some early believers had land and houses that they could sell and give the proceeds to the community (2:45; 4:36-37). Even if this was overstated, it emphasizes that in this earliest period of the Messianic community, few were in need or want because believers shared their belongings. This also points out that some early believers were quite poor. Not only that, when we read all of what Paul had to say in the B’rit Chadashah, we see that there was a considerable number of poor believers in Jerusalem and Judea that needed to be taken care of, especially in times of famine (Galatians 2:10; Second Corinthians 9:12; Romans 15:22-26).

Fourth, is the mention of names, titles or functions, which may suggest a person of some social status. We see this in a figure like Barnabas who is said to be a Levite; or even a great number of the Cohanim were becoming obedient to the faith (6:7); or perhaps with figures like Joseph of Arimathea or Nicodemus who seem to have been part of the Sanhedrin, both of whom were members of the Great Sanhedrin. The tomb of Joseph used to bury Yeshua suggests to most that Joseph was a reasonably well-to-do person. This evidence, however, is not absolute because various priests and Levites could be rather poor, and apart from their religious status not really better off than various merchants, craftsmen, or unskilled laborers. Sometimes Levites could supplement their income by being scribes. Therefore, Messiah’s community was a microcosm of Yerushalayim itself. Neither wealthy nor the poor were excluded, and it is remarkable how seldom social or economic status is even mentioned in Acts.⁹⁹

Peter and John Stand before the Sanhedrin 
4: 1-31

31-33 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

Peter and John stand before the Sanhedrin DIG: What roles did the kohanim, the captain of the Temple guard, and the Sadducees play in the ministry of Yeshua (see Luke 20:27-40, 22:6 and 52)? Why would the Sadducees oppose the proclamation of the apostles? What would you feel if you were Peter and John? What is the high priest’s family trying to do in verse 7 – search for information to intimidate the apostles? If you were one of the authorities, what would be your reaction to Peter’s bold answer? How does Peter’s filling with the Ruach ha-Kodesh in verses 8-12 compare with the purpose of the filling in 2:4 (also see Luke 21:12-13)? How does the response of the Jewish leaders compare with their response when Lazarus was raised from the dead (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Ia – The Resurrection of Lazarus: The First Sign of Jonah)? How do the Sanhedrin and the apostles each view themselves and ADONAI? Why might the apostles begin the prayer recalling God’s sovereignty (4:24-28)? What is one purpose of the Ruach’s filling (2:4, 4:8 and 31)?

REFLECT: How are your prayers in a crisis like and unlike this prayer? When, if ever, do you feel that Peter’s response to his political and religious leaders might be appropriate for believers today? How do you reconcile this passage with Romans 13:1-4? What is the most persecution you have personally experienced due to your faith? How did you take it? Do you believe Peter’s statement in verse 12? What has built your assurance the most? Are there any doubts that still linger? How has knowing Yeshua shaped your character so that people might notice that there is something different about you and ask about it?

The healing of the lame beggar (to see link click Ap – Peter Heals a Lame Beggar) and Peter’s speech (see Aq – Peter Speaks at the Temple) made a great impression on the common people, but it aroused the opposition of the Jewish leaders who arrested the two apostles and brought them before a meeting of the Sanhedrin in order to question them (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lg – The Great Sanhedrin). Peter’s brief speech repeated the essential facts concerning the resurrection of Yeshua, with the added emphasis that the Lord alone could save the people.⁸²

The arrest: Up to this point there had been no resistance to the Messianic believers on the part of the Jewish leadership in Yerushalayim. But, the reason for the Sanhedrin’s involvement in what at first glance seems to be a minor public disturbance lies in the political ramifications of the “Yeshua movement.” Messianic “pretenders” characteristically drew great crowds of followers whose nationalistic fervor was likely to bring a swift response from the Roman authorities. The Jewish leadership was always worried about this to the extent that the Romans might come and take away both [their] Holy Place [the Temple] and [their] nation (John 11:48). Josephus describes such “zealot” movements as having a “passion for liberty that is almost unconquerable, since they are convinced that God alone is their Leader and Master. Luke mentions three figures involved in such revolutionary activities in Acts – Theudas, Judah, and the Egyptian – all of whom received harsh treatment at the hands of the Roman forces sent to deal with them (5:36-37, 21:37-38). As possible perpetrators of such a revolutionary movement, the Council had presumably been keeping a close eye on the apostles and disciples.⁸³

As Peter and John were speaking to the common people, some of the twenty four kohanim (chief priests), who were all Sadducees, and the captain of the Temple guard burst upon them suddenly (4:1). The captain of the Temple guard was in charge of the Temple police and was therefore responsible to keep order in the Temple Compound, and was sometimes referred to as ish har ha-bayit, or the chief man of the (Temple) mountain. He was always a Sadducee and his authority was second only to the high priest himself. The Sadducees were especially jealous over the control of the Temple Compound. They were indignant because Peter and John were teaching the people. The Sadducees viewed them as merely unschooled Galileans with no rabbinic training and were not authorized to teach in the Temple Compound. More importantly, they were announcing that Yeshua had been resurrected from the dead (4:2). The Sadducees didn’t believe in the resurrection from the dead in general, but worse, Peter and John were teaching about the resurrection of Jesus! These same Sadducees had just rejected Yeshua as the Messiah and put Him to death! And that bothered them even more.

So they grabbed them suddenly and put them in jail until the next day (see the commentary on the Life of Solomon Af – Prisoners for ADONAI), for it was already evening, and supposedly no trial could be conducted at night (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lh – The Laws of the Great Sanhedrin Regarding Trials), although that didn’t stop them when they wanted to get rid of Messiah! The Temple Compound had chambers where unruly people could be jailed by the Temple guard (4:3).

But many who heard the message believed, and the number of the men (not counting the women) came to about five thousand (4:4). So the Messianic community exploded as a result of Peter’s speech.

The trial: On the next day, when a trial could be conducted, the members of the Great Sanhedrin, the twenty-four chief priests (who were Sadducees) and elders (the leading men of the City) and Torah-teachers (who were Pharisees) were gathered together in Jerusalem. These were the same Jewish rulers who had just recently condemned Yeshua to death. Peter and John must have thought that they were going to meet the same fate, and they would be crucified just like their Master. But they didn’t hesitate.

Annas, the kohen gadol was there. He was the recognized high priest as far as the Jewish community was concerned. But the Romans deposed him because they thought he had too much control. Undaunted, he continued to control everything behind the scenes with his extended family: five of his own sons, including Jonathan mentioned here, one grandson, and one-son-in-law, Caiaphas, succeeded him. Even after he was deposed, Annas was the real power behind the scenes and controlled the finances in the Temple Compound. It was his business holdings that Yeshua overthrew on two occasions. First, at the beginning of His ministry (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Bs – Jesus’ First Cleansing of the Temple at the Passover), and second, on the Monday before He was crucified (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Iv – Jesus Entered the Temple Area and Drove Out All Who Were Buying and Selling). Annas may well have felt that, by preaching this message to the people, Yeshua’s followers were attempting to make the Great Sanhedrin responsible for Messiah’s death – which they were (2:23, 3:14-15, 5:27ff, 7:51-52, 13:27-29, 23:6-9 and 24:1)!⁸⁴

The interrogation began when they had placed Peter and John in their midst. The Sanhedrin was arranged like the half of a round threshing-floor so they might see one another. The Council met on the second floor of the Royal Stoa. 

 Before them stood the two scribes of the judges, one to the right and one to the left, and they wrote down the words of Council members that favored acquittal and the words of them that favored conviction (M Sanh 4:3).

They began to inquire scornfully: By what strange power, or in what name, has this been done by people like you (4:5-7)! The word for power (Greek: dunamei) used here implies some sort of incantation. When they said, in what name, they implied that Peter used magic. They could not deny that a miracle had taken place, so the Great Sanhedrin used the same tactic that they used with Jesus. The Council could not deny the messianic miracles that Messiah had performed, but because He would have nothing to do with the traditions of men (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ei – The Oral Law), they claimed that He was demon-possessed (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ek – It is only by Beelzebub, the Prince of Demons, That This Fellow Drives Out Demons). And because the Council had no other explanation for this miracle, they came to the same conclusion with Peter.

Then even though John was present, again Peter takes the lead. At that moment he was filled with the Ruach ha-Kodesh. There is a difference between being immersed with the Ruach and filled with the Ruach. At the moment of salvation, every believer is immersed with the Ruach ha-Kodesh (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Bw – What God Does For Us at the Moment of Faith). It is a one-time event. However, every believer needs to be continually filled, or controlled by, the Ruach. We are leaky vessels and, as a result, this needs to happen throughout our lifetime. So at this time Peter is controlled by the Ruach ha-Kodesh, and is able to give a formidable defense to the Sanhedrin, just as Yeshua said that the apostles would be able to do: Be on your guard against men; they will hand you over to the local councils and flog you in their Sanhedrins on My account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it in each and every situation. At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be [just] you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you (Mattityahu 10:17-20).

The speech: Then Peter said to them, “Rulers and elders of the people!” This is the first opportunity that Peter has been able to directly address the Great Sanhedrin. The speeches in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 were given to the people, but here it is addressed to the rulers and elders of the people. The question they had asked of Peter was: By what power or in what name did you do this! So, he gives the explanation of the miracle: If we are on trial today for a mitzvah done for a sick man, as to how this fellow was healed (Greek: sozo), let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Isra’el, that by the name of Yeshua ha-Mashiach ha-Natzrati. But Peter, empowered by the Spirit of God, didn’t hold back anything and added: Whom you had crucified – whom God raised from the dead – this one (who had been arrested along with the apostles) stands before you whole (4:7-10). There had been a dramatic change in Peter. Not too long beforehand, when confronted as an apostle of Jesus, he had denied the Lord three times (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lk – Peter Denies Jesus Three Times). But now, right in the chambers of the Council, Peter charges them with murder.

Under divine inspiration, Peter then paraphrases Psalm 118:22, turns the tables and puts the Jewish rulers and elders on trial, saying: This Yeshua, the One you have crucified, He is “the stone – rejected by you, the builders (the Jewish leaders) – that has become the chief cornerstone.” The image of the “testing stone,” a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense (First Peter 2:8), appears to lie behind Yeshua’s function as the one destined to cause the fall and rise of many in Isra’el, and sign to be opposed (Luke 2:34b-35a). Consequently, Psalm 118 serves a dual purpose for Peter, providing him with an opportunity to designate Yeshua as the Messiah as well as to indict the Sanhedrin for His death.

The sages liked to describe themselves as “builders” because they loved God’s Word and used a play-on-words from Isaiah 54:13 to make their point. Where it reads: All your children (Hebrew: banayik) will be taught by ADONAI. Your builders (Hebrew: bonayik) will have great shalom.⁸⁵ Thus, while they thought they were building up God’s Word, they were actually tearing it down! What an indictment, “The one you rejected, God made the cornerstone!” Then he drove his final point into their hearts. There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved (4:11-12)! This is offensive to our pluralistic, liberal age, but it is the plain teaching of the Bible. Therefore, the very name that the healing was done is the only name by which one can be saved. The word saved here is a form of the same verb (Greek: sozo) used in 4:9 above to describe the healing of the lame beggar. Salvation is found only in Yeshua ha-Mashiach ha-Natzrati. There is no other way!

It is easy to see that this lame beggar is a picture of our salvation. He was born crippled, and all of us are born unable to walk so as to please Ha’Shem. Our father Adam had a fall and passed his lameness on to us (Romans 5:12-21). The man was also poor, and we are sinners are bankrupt before YHVH, unable to pay the tremendous debt that we owe Him (Luke 7:36-50). He was outside the Temple, and all sinners are separated from God, no matter how near to the door they might be. The lame beggar was healed wholly by the grace of God (Ephesians 2:8-9). His healing was immediate, and our spiritual healing is also immediate at the moment of faith (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Bw – What God Does For Us at the Moment of Faith) . He gave evidence of what God had done in his life by walking, leaping and praising God, and by publicly identifying himself with the apostles, both in the Temple and in their arrests (4:14). We should also give evidence of what God has done for us by our walk with Jesus by being conformed into His image (Romans 8:29).⁸⁶

In the Great Commission, Jesus said: Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, immersing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Ruach ha-Kodesh, teaching them to observe all I have commanded you (Matthew 28:19). And God has given us the privilege of urging everyone to come into His favor and be reconciled to Him (Second Corinthians 5:19 LB). Paul calls us co-laborers and says: We are workers together with God (Second Corinthians 6:1). Yeshua has secured our salvation, put us in His family, given us His Ruach, and then made us His agents for change. What a privilege! We have the greatest news in the world, and sharing it with others is the greatest kindness you can show anyone. Salvation is found only in Jesus of Nazareth.⁸⁷

The decision: Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John and because of their distinctive Galilean accent, the rulers quickly figured out they were laymen without any rabbinic training, they were continually amazed. Obviously, John spoke, but what he said wasn’t recorded. They began to remember that these men had been with Yeshua. But seeing the healed man standing with them, they had nothing to say (for the moment) in response because the evidence of the miracle was standing right in front of them (4:13-14). There was only one inference the leaders could draw, but they refused to draw the obvious conclusion. They sat there in silence.

The Great Sanhedrin was reliving its worst nightmare. It was as if they were saying, “These guys are just like Jesus! We thought we solved the Yeshua problem when we crucified Him, but now it’s worse than ever! They were proclaiming with irrefutable proof that He has risen from the dead.”

When they had ordered Peter and John to go out of the council chamber located on the second floor of the Royal Stoa, they began to confer with one another, saying: What shall we do with these men? For indeed, it’s obvious to everyone living in Jerusalem that a remarkable miracle has happened through them, and we cannot deny it. But so it won’t spread any further among the people, let’s threaten them not to speak anymore to anyone in this name (4:15-17). How can Luke know what went on behind closed doors? We know that Paul was a member of the Great Sanhedrin before he was saved (6:8-7:60 and 26:10-11). Joseph of Arimathea was both a believer and a member of the Council (Mark 15:43), and Nicodemus, also a secret believer, was probably in the Sanhedrin also (John 7:50). Luke, in his extensive research (Luke 1:3), would have consulted with them or other members of the Council who came to faith later on.⁸⁸

So, they called them in and ordered them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Yeshua. Without any clear violation, the Sanhedrin appears to have warned Peter and John that it viewed their activities as bordering on violating the Oral Law. Having been thus warned, the apostles were under criminal responsibility not to repeat the offense. Although Peter and John refused to obey the Great Sanhedrin, they nevertheless treated them with respect. But Peter and John replied: Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you spiritual teachers of Isra’el . . . you decide. For we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard (4:18-20). This was an important crossroad in the history of the Church. Had the apostles acquiesced to the demands of the Council, all later Church history would have been radically different. Everything hinged on their willingness to obey ADONAI at all costs – even their lives.⁸⁹

While Paul and Peter commanded believers to be in subjection to the governing authorities (Romans 13:1-7; First Peter 2:13-17), there appear to be times when believers may disobey governing authorities. “Civil disobedience” may be defined as any action taken by an individual citizen who, out of regard for personal conscience, violates the laws of government that are in conflict with the higher power law of God. We find numerous examples of civil disobedience in Scripture: the Hebrew midwives (Exodus 1:15-17), Moses’ parents (1:22-2:3), Rahab (Joshua 2), Obadiah (First Kings 18), Dani’el’s friends (Dani’el 3), Dani’el (Dani’el 6), Peter and the apostles (Acts 4:19-20, 5:9), and Paul (16:37-40). It seems clear from these examples that when civil law and the commands of Scripture are in opposition, we must recognize and obey the higher decree – God’s decree. God’s commands take precedence over all human authority (5:29). The biblical examples of civil disobedience are seen in the following areas: (1) protection of human life; (2) protection of God’s people; (3) refusing to bow down to a false god; (4) refusing to cease personal worship of God; and (5) refusing to cease proclamation of the gospel.⁹⁰

Faced with this defiance of their command, the Council could do no more than repeat their threats of what would happen if the apostles landed in their court again. After threatening them again, they let them go – finding no way they could punish them on account of the people, because they all were continually glorifying God for what had happened. They had broken no Jewish law so there was no means for punishing them. For the man in whom this miracle of healing had happened was more than forty years old (4:21-22).

The prayer: The report that the Sanhedrin had released Peter and John without punishment was cause for rejoicing among the Messianic community. As soon as they were released, Peter and John went to [the other apostles] and reported all that the ruling kohanim (Sadducees) and elders (Pharisees) had said to them. When they heard it, they joined together in prayer and lifted their voices in unity to God and said: O Sovereign Master, “You made heaven and earth and the sea, and everything in them (Acts 4:23-24; Exodus 20:11; Psalm 146:6; Nehemiah 9:6). You said by the Ruach ha-Kodesh, through the mouth of our father David Your servant,

‘Why did the nations rage
and the peoples plot foolish things (4:25 LXX)?
The kings of the earth took their stand
and the rulers were gathered together
against Adonai and against His
Anointed One’ (4:26 LXX).”

Scripture always has dual authorship, divine and human, so here we see the Ruach ha-Kodesh and David as authors of this quote in Psalm 2:1-2. Luke quotes the TaNaKh almost always in a form either corresponding to the LXX or close to it, and not according to the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Here Psalm 2:1-2 is quoted verbatim from the LXX.⁹¹ It was this sovereign Lord who had prophesied in the Psalms about the foolish efforts of the rulers of this world to rebel against the Messiah. The unspoken thought is quite clearly that it is useless for mankind to plot against YHVH who not only created the entire universe (Genesis 1:1), but also foresaw their scheming.

Psalm 2:1-2 truly expresses what had happened in that here in Jerusalem there had been an alliance against God’s anointed. Both Jews and Gentiles were responsible for the death of Christ, “For truly both Herod Antipas and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles, meaning the Romans, and the peoples of Isra’el, were gathered together in this city against Your holy Servant Yeshua (see the commentary on Isaiah Iy – The Death of the Suffering Servant), whom You anointed at His baptism (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Bi – The Baptism of Jesus). But there was also a divine responsibility: They did whatever Your hand and Your purpose predetermined to happen (4:27-28).” It was all part of God’s plan.

When we pray, we must see our circumstances in light of God’s Word. For example, when we are in conflict, perhaps we need to know that our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the worldly forces of this darkness, and against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places (Ephesians 6:12).

Seeing our circumstances in light of God’s Word also means seeing when there is a sin problem. If that is the case, we should pray with David, “When I kept it all inside me, my bones turned to powder, my words became daylong groans. The pressure never let up; all the juices of my life dried up” (Psalm 32:3-4 Peterson). Perhaps we are in the same place as David was, in sin and needing to confess and get right with God.

We also use the Bible to pray for the promises of ADONAI. When we need strength, we can pray that God would grant you to be strengthened in your inner being with power through His Ruach (Ephesians 3:16). God’s Word will speak to our situation.⁹²

So, they began the prayer meditating upon God, and then they related in the prayer the circumstances past and present. Then they made three specific prayer requests. First, and now, Lord, look at their threats and give us boldness. Second, grant Your servants to speak Your word with utmost courage. And third, confirm Your message while You stretch out Your hand to heal, and signs and wonders take place through the name of Your holy Servant Yeshua.”

The effect of the prayer was remarkable. When they had prayed, the place where they were gathered was shaken. As in his account of the events of Shavu’ot, Luke’s language resembles the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai. Here, he recalls the description of Exodus 19:18: Not the entire Mount Sinai was in smoke, because ADONAI had descended upon it in fire. The smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace. The whole mountain quaked greatly.

And they were all filled (controlled) with the Ruach ha-Kodesh and continually speak the word of God with boldness (4:29-31). What they had prayed for, they received. Once again, the filling of the Spirit of God, means to be controlled by the Spirit, and this happens continually over our lifetime. And as with the apostles, we are leaky vessels and need continual filling of the Ruach ha-Kodesh. Therefore, the apostles were empowered to continue witnessing in spite of the opposition coming from the Jewish Supreme Court, the Great Sanhedrin.

The Messianic Community had successfully faced its first trial of opposition. Instead of giving in to the temptation to compromise the gospel, it became even bolder. The persecution also served to draw the Jewish believers closer together and to their Lord. In what was to become a recurring theme in Church history, opposition only made the invisible, universal Church of Yeshua Messiah grow stronger. As He had with Joseph (Genesis 50:20), God took the evil intentions of mankind and used them for His own purposes.⁹³

Peter Speaks at the Temple
3: 11-26

31-33 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

Peter speaks at the Temple DIG: How is this situation like the one earlier (to see link click Al – The Ruach ha-Kodesh Comes at Shavu’ot)? List all the facts about Jesus that Peter mentions here. How does this profile of Jesus compares to the one in 2:22-24? A person’s name meant his or her whole character. Hence, what does Peter mean by verse 16? What does Peter say about the people? How would you feel as one of them when you heard verse 15? From Peter’s second recorded proclamation, how would you sum up what it means to be saved? In spite of what Peter says about them in verses 13-15, how does he give the people hope in verses 24-26? How are blessing and turning related?

REFLECT: Of all the truths about Yeshua that Peter emphasizes here, which one especially impacts you? Why? When is it proper to come on strong against a person’s sin, like Peter did in verses 13-15? How were you saved? If you had to explain the meaning of Messiah just using the TaNaKh, what passages would you use? What does Peter’s use of the TaNaKh indicate how valuable it is to your faith? How has repentance and turning to ADONAI brought times of refreshment to you? How can that be used as a means of encouraging others to step over the line from knowledge to faith?

The pattern of incidents on Shavu’ot repeats itself here as the miraculous healing of the lame beggar from birth (to see link click Ap – Peter Heals a Lamb Beggar) is followed by a speech by Peter to the astonished crowd. In this case Peter again begins by dealing with a possible misunderstanding of the situation and then proceeds to explain how the power of Yeshua, raised from the dead, had healed him. Then, seizing on the opportunity, Peter pressed home the point that it was Messiah, whom the Jews had killed, and who had been glorified by ADONAI, was still active and alive.⁷¹

The healing of the lame beggar drew a crowd around the three men. While the healed beggar was clinging to Peter and John, all the people together came running toward them in the place called Solomon’s Colonnade (3:11).  It was a corridor where our Lord had ministered (John 10:23) and where the community worshiped (5:12). As He did for Peter’s first speech, the Ruach ha-Kodesh provided a dramatic introduction for his second speech. All of the sudden, Peter had huge gathering and he grasped the opportunity to explain the significance of what had happened. He stood with the other apostles on Solomon’s Colonnade in the Temple, a living illustration that the power of ADONAI rested on them. Of course, this posed a serious threat to the authority of the Sanhedrin (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lg – The Great Sanhedrin).

When Peter saw the crowd gathering and the look of amazement on their faces, he was not about to miss the opportunity to witness to them. But before launching into his speech, he asked two questions. First, he asked: Men of Isra’el, why are you amazed at this? A mild rebuke. As the covenant people, they knew YHVH to be a miracle-working God. Miracles had played an important role in their history. More recently, Yeshua had performed miracles to authenticate that He was the Messiah. That God should work another miracle through His apostles shouldn’t have been a surprise to them. Secondly, Peter inquired: Why do you stare at us – as if by our own power or godliness we had made this man walk (3:12)? They should have known that two Galilean fishermen had neither the power nor the godliness to perform such a miracle on their own. But whatever the crowd thought, Peter wanted to direct their attention to the source of the miracle. The greatness of his speech was that it was all about Yeshua.

The immediate explanation does not come until 3:16 below; but first of all, Peter needed to set the scene. He took the theme of his speech and matched the name of Yeshua Messiah to it. He presented several of the many names of our Lord, all of which have messianic implications. The Covenant God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His Servant Yeshua by His resurrection and by His ascension – the One you handed over (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ln – The Civil Trial) and disowned before Pilate, though he had decided to release Him (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lq – Jesus Sentenced to Be Crucified). Then Peter pressed his point against the Jews. But you rejected the Holy and Righteous One and asked for a murderer to be granted to you (bar-Abbas, which means salvation, son of the father). So, while bar-Abbas was actually guilty, true salvation, God’s Servant Yeshua, was not guilty. Nevertheless, you killed the Prince of life (see the commentary on Isaiah Iy – The Death of the Suffering Servant) – the One God raised from the dead! We are eyewitnesses of it (3:13-15). 

Then after pointing out that they had nothing to do with the miracle, and that God had sent them the Messiah whom they had rejected, Peter puts together the two concepts together to explain the healing. Now through faith in the name of Yeshua, His name has strengthened this man whom you see and know. At some point, we do not know when, the beggar believed in Yeshua as the Messiah. Indeed, the faith through Yeshua has given this man perfect health in front of you all (3:16).

But Peter did not leave the people without hope as he drew his conclusion: Now brothers (fellow Jews), I know that you acted in ignorance, just as your leaders did (First Corinthians 2:8). In the commandments of the Torah, there was a difference between deliberate sins and sins of ignorance (Leviticus Chapters 4 and 5; Numbers 15:22-31). The person who sinned boldly was a rebel against YHVH and was guilty of a great sin and would suffer the most severe judgment. He would be declared cherem, means to be devoted to destruction. Such a one was to be “cut off” from the community (Numbers 15:30-31), which could mean excommunication and even death. The defiant brazen sinner was condemned, but the person who sinned unwittingly and without deliberate intent was given the opportunity to repent and seek forgiveness.⁷²

But their ignorance did not pardon their guilt, for what God foretold through the mouth of all His prophets in the TaNaKh – that His Messiah was to suffer – so He has fulfilled (3:17-18). Not giving the specific passages in the TaNaKh, Peter assumes his audience is aware of the relevant passages already and has their agreement that they apply to the death of the Messiah, otherwise at this point he would have lost his audience.⁷³ This was a totally Jewish audience, there was Judaism with Yeshua and Judaism without Him (the same choice, along with the possibility of rejecting both, faces Jews today).

In light of what happened, what should Isra’el do now? Repent and change their minds about Jesus, that He was not demon possessed, but He is the long waited for Messiah (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ek – It is only by Beelzebub, the Prince of Demons, That This Fellow Drives Out Demons). If they do this, certain results will follow.

ADONAI will forgive your sin: Having announced the crime, presented the evidence, and explained the nature of their sin, Peter then offered them a pardon. What a strange thing for a prosecuting attorney to become the defense attorney and the pardoning judge! Peter’s burden was to encourage his fellow Israelites to trust in Messiah and experience His gracious salvation.⁷⁴

What did he tell them to do? Repent, therefore, and return so your individual sins might be blotted out (3:19a). Ink in the ancient world had no acid content and didn’t “bite” into the paper. It could almost always be wiped off with a damp cloth. Peter says that ADONAI will wipe away our record of sin just like that!⁷⁵ This phrase is used in the book of Revelation both of ADONAI who wipes away our tears: God shall wipe away every tear from [our] eyes (Revelation 7:17 and 21:4); and of Messiah who refuses to erase the names of overcomers from the Book of Life: The one who overcomes thus will be dressed in white clothes; I will never blot his or her name out of the Book of Life (Revelation 3:5).

Repentance, however, involves more than a mere intellectual decision. It is a change of mind that results in a change of behavior. God’s design is for people to repent (17:30). To accomplish that purpose, He uses at least four prompters. First, the knowledge of YHVH’s revealed truth in the Scriptures should cause people to repent (Matthew 11:21-24; Luke 16:30-31; John 20:30-31). Second, our Lord uses sorrow for sin to lead people to repentance (Second Corinthians 7:9-10). Third, God’s goodness and kindness are to motivate people to repent. And a final motivation to repent is the fear of final judgment (17:30-31).⁷⁶

The message of repentance was not new to the Jews, for John the Immerser had preached it as did Yeshua (Matthew 3:2, 4:17). In one sense, repentance is a gift from God (Acts 11:18); in another sense, it is the heart’s response to the convicting ministry of the Ruach ha-Kodesh (26:20). The person who sincerely repents will have little problem putting his faith in the Savior.⁷⁷

In the first part of his speech Peter gave his hearers abundant evidence that Isra’el had reached the wrong conclusion about Yeshua Messiah. Then he called on them to repent and reverse their verdict concerning Yeshua and place their faith in Him. To help persuade them, he gives them promised results: God will forgive their sin, the Kingdom will come, Messiah will return, their individual judgment will be avoided, and blessing will be realized.

The Kingdom will come: Nationally, Isra’el’s national repentance will usher in the Messianic Kingdom. The phrase, the times of relief, is a Jewish figure of speech meaning the Messianic Kingdom (see the commentary on Isaiah Cz – The Reign of Immanuel), it [will] come from the presence of the Lord (Greek: kurios). Jesus will not come bringing the blessings of the Messianic Kingdom (see the commentary on Isaiah Gj – The Restoration of Isra’el), apart from Isra’el’s repentance (3:19b).

The Messiah will return: And God the Father, may send Yeshua (seethe commentary on Isaiah Kg – The Second Coming of Jesus Christ to Bozrah), the Messiah appointed for you, for Isra’el (3:20). Peter was actually calling for the national repentance because Isra’el’s leaders had denied her Messiah and condemned Him to die. Thus, Peter declared that just as the Jewish leadership once led the nation into rejecting Jesus as the Messiah, they must one day lead the nation to accepting Jesus as the Messiah (see the commentary on Revelation Ev – The Basis for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ). But the nation did not repent (and this was certainly no surprise to YHVH) so the message of the gospel would eventually also include the Samaritans in Acts 8 and the Gentiles in Acts 10. But, presently, heaven must receive Him (1:9-11), and there He must stay until the time of the restoration of all the things (Matthew 19:28), the Messianic Kingdom, that God spoke about long ago through the mouth of His holy prophets (3:21). 

Individual judgment can be avoided: As an example of a prophet through which God spoke, Peter cites Moshe, Isra’el’s first and greatest prophet. Moses spoke of the coming Messiah, “Adonai your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from among your brothers. Hear and obey Him in all that He shall say to you (3:22).” In what way was Moshe different than all the other prophets? It’s spelled out in Numbers 12:8. Whereas YHVH spoke to other prophets by dreams and visions, but in the case of Moshe, He spoke face to face. The point here is that Jesus is a prophet like Moses whom God would speak face to face. And just as Moshe commanded, Yeshua is now the One to be obeyed. Moshe warned of the consequences of rejecting the Messiah, “And it shall be that every soul that will not listen to that Prophet shall be completely cut off from the people (3:23).” Again, in this context the Prophet applies to Yeshua. But to those individuals in that generation who rejected the Messiah, judgment was coming (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Mt – The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple on Tisha B’Av in 70 AD). Luke quotes the TaNaKh almost always in a form either corresponding to the LXX or close to it, and not according to the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Here Deuteronomy 18:15 and 19 are quoted close but not exactly corresponding to the LXX.⁷⁸ Not only did Moses prophesy about the coming of Jesus, but, indeed, all the prophets who have spoken from Samuel (the last judge and the first prophet) on have announced these days (3:24).

Blessing will be realized: Peter closes on a positive note. In spite of their sin of rejecting the Messiah, they were still the covenant people (Romans 9:3-5). You, you indeed, are the sons of the prophets, in other words, you are the heirs of the promises made by ADONAI through the prophets. Because of God’s mercy, grace and love for Isra’el, He did not permanently reject them even when they rejected His Son (Romans 11:2). And also, you are the sons of the covenant that God cut with your fathers, saying to Abraham, “In your seed shall all the [Gentile] families of the earth be blessed (3:25).” This is the foundational promise of the TaNaKh. Once again, Luke quotes Genesis 22:18 close to, but not exactly corresponding to, the LXX.⁷⁹

Therefore, God raised up His Servant (3:13) and sent Him first to you, to bless you all by turning each of you from your wicked ways (3:26). We have already seen this theme of the Jew first in the coming of the Spirit of God to the Messianic community at Shavu’ot (see Al – The Ruach ha-Kodesh Comes at Shavu’ot). He had just pointed out that the Gentiles would benefit from Christ’s coming, but there would be a divine order and that would be to the Jew first. Rabbi Sha’ul would write: For I am not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of god that brings salvation to everyone who believes; first to the Jew, and then to the Gentile (Romans 1:16). This sermon is not a re-offer of the Messianic Kingdom, but states the requirements for the establishment of the Kingdom. That is Isra’el’s national salvation.⁸⁰

As you review this section of Acts, you cannot help but be impressed with some practical truths that should encourage all of us in our witnessing for Christ.

God is longsuffering with lost sinners. The leaders of Isra’el had rejected the ministry of John the Immerser (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Fl – John the Baptist Beheaded) and the ministry of Yeshua, and yet ADONAI gave them another opportunity to repent and be saved. They had denied and slaughtered their own Messiah, and yet God patiently held back His judgment and sent His Ruach to deal with them. Today, God’s people also need patience as we witness to a lost world.

True witness involves the “bad news” of sin and guilt as well as the “Good News” of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. There can be no true faith in Messiah unless first there is repentance from sin. It is the ministry of the Ruach ha-Kodesh to convict lost sinners (John 16:7-11), and He will do this if we witness faithfully and use God’s Word correctly.

The way to reach the masses is by helping the individual sinner. Peter and John won the crippled beggar, and his transformed life led to the conversion of two thousand men (not counting the women), growing to five thousand (4:4) from three thousand at last count (2:41)! The servant of God who has no time for personal work with individual sinners will not be given many opportunities for ministering to great crowds. Like Jesus, the apostles took time for individuals.

The best defense of our faith is a changed life. The healed beggar was “exhibit A” in Peter’s defense of the resurrection of Yeshua Messiah. In his evangelistic ministries, the Methodist preacher Samuel Chadwick used to pray for “a Lazarus” in every campaign, some “great sinner” whose conversion would shock the community. He got this idea from John 12:9-11. God answered his prayers in meeting after meeting as infamous wicked men and women trusted in Christ and because witnesses through their changed lives.

Whenever God blesses, Satan shows up to oppose the work and silence the witnesses, and often the devil uses religious people to do his dirty work. Just as the Sanhedrin (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lg – The Great Sanhedrin) opposed the ministry of Messiah, it also opposed the ministry of the apostles, and the god of this world (Second Corinthians 4:4) will oppose you today. The important thing is not that we are comfortable, but that the name of the Lord is glorified through the preaching of the gospel.

ADONAI has promised to bless and use His Word, so let’s be faithful to witness. Yeshua even prayed that our witness would have success: I pray not on behalf of [the apostles] only, but also for those who believe in Me through their message (John 17:20). Therefore, we have every reason to be encouraged. There is power in the name of Jesus, so, we don’t need to be afraid to witness and call sinners to repent.

The name of Yeshua Messiah still has power! While we may not perform the same miracles today that were seen in the days of the early Messianic Community/Church, we can still claim the authority of Jesus Christ as He has commanded us in His Word. We can proclaim repentance for the removal of sins (Luke 24:47) so that people might believe and have life through His name (John 20:30). We can give someone a cup of cold water in His name (Mark 9:41), and we can receive a child in His name (Matthew 18:5). These ministries may not seem as spectacular as healing a cripple, but they are still important to the work of God.

We can ask in His name was we pray (John 14:13-14, 15:16, 16:23-26). When we ask the Father something in the name of Yeshua Messiah, it is as though the Lord Himself were asking it. If we remember this, it will help to keep us from asking for things unworthy of His name. Yes, the name of Jesus Christ still has authority and power. Let us go forth into the world with His mighty Name.81

Peter Heals a Lame Beggar
3: 1-10

31-33 AD
The events of Acts 3-8 transpire with mounting concern on the part of the Jews, and especially the Jewish authorities in Yerushalayim. The rising tension resulted in vigilante action taken against Stephen, and then an authorized effort under Rabbi Sha’ul to disrupt and destroy that new Messianic movement, involving persecution and even death of the believers. The persecution led various believers such as Philip to go to Samaria and bear witness of Yeshua.

Peter heals a lame beggar DIG: As the lame man, what would you write as a diary entry for a typical day? When Peter grabs your hand, what thoughts flood your mind? What do you write in your diary after the events here? What was the purpose of miracles at that time (see 2:19 and 22). What happened to this gift after all the apostles had passed away?

REFLECT: Since ADONAI still heals today, why doesn’t He heal everyone in need? Can we demand that God heal us or a loved one that we know? If that were true, who would be God? Are we not healed because of our lack of faith or God’s sovereign will? Many times people who have a loved one died blame God? Why would a loving God take my child? My wife? My husband? My best friend? Who is responsible for all the misery and heart ache in the world (John 10:10)? How can you comfort yourself or others?

The main theme in Acts Chapters 3-5 is the way in which the witness of the first believers brought themselves into conflict with the Jewish leaders, who continually attempted to put a stop to their preaching. Two such incidents are recorded in 3:1 to 4:31 and 5:17-42, which are separated by an account of the Messianic community and how it dealt with its first internal problem in 4:32-5:16. On each occasion the power of the apostles to perform miracles led an attempt by the Sanhedrin to stop them.⁶²

As was their custom, Peter and John went up together to the Temple one afternoon at three o’clock, the hour of the afternoon (Hebrew: minchah) prayers. The believers were still attached to the Temple and to the traditional hour of prayer (Psalm 55:17; Dani’el 6:10; Acts 10:30), which followed the afternoon sacrifice. This did not compromise their new faith in Yeshua in any way. The word went up (Greek: anebainon) indicates continuous action; they were continually going up to the Temple to pray. Luke mentions both Peter and John, but while John played a major role in the gospels, he plays no major role in the book of Acts. If John is mentioned at all, it is always in conjunction with someone else. The key figures in Acts are Peter and Paul and others are brought into the story only as they relate to these two men. Earlier Luke told us that many signs and wonders were happening through the apostles (2:43), and here we are going to see what one of those signs and wonders were. In addition, we learned that day-by-day they continued with one mind, spending time at the Temple (2:46a). Peter and John went to the Temple at the ninth hour (three o’clock in the afternoon and the time of the evening sacrifice), the hour of prayer (3:1).⁶³

At that time they had a unique meeting with a lame man who they had seen many times before. And a certain man lame from his mother’s womb was carried, whom they laid daily at the Beautiful Gate to ask alms from those who entered the Temple (3:2). The rabbis teach that there three pillars of Judaism, the Torah, worship and the showing of kindness, or charity. Almsgiving was one of the main ways to show kindness and is thus considered a major expression of one’s devotion to God. With their minds set on worship, those who entered the Temple for the afternoon prayers would be particularly disposed to practice their piety by generously giving alms to the lame beggar.⁶⁴ The Beautiful Gate was located inside the wall of partition that separated the Court of the Gentiles from the Court of the Women. For the lame man it was a very strategic gate because it was the entrance to the court of the Women.  This inner area of the Temple compound was open to both men and women. It was the common place for worship for everyone, functioning to a certain extent, as a Temple synagogue in the open air. It was a large area that covered 70.87 by 70.87 meters, 5,023 square meters, or 16,475 square feet.⁶⁵

And along the same wall as the Nicanor Gate there were positioned 13 chests (shopharoth) for offerings called the Treasury.  These chests were called shophars in the Talmud because they were narrow at the mouth and wide at the bottom, and therefore each looked like a trumpet. Each was specifically marked. Eight of them were the receipt of what was legally due by worshipers, the other five, however, were strictly for voluntary gifts. He was there for the hour of prayer so that there would be a lot of traffic through the gate. Therefore, all those tithing had to walk right past this lame beggar with money in their hands.

When he saw Peter and John about to go into the Temple he made the request that he had made countless times before and stretched out his hand asking them for alms. And fixing his eyes on him, with John, Peter said, “Look at us.” So he gave them his attention, expecting to receive something more than normal from them. But since the believers had pooled their resources (2:44-45), the two apostles had no money to give, but money was not what lame beggar needed most. He needed salvation for his soul and healing for his body. Money could provide neither.

So, Peter said: Silver and gold I do not have, but what I do have I give you: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk (Greek: peripatei, meaning begin to walk and keep on walking). The beggar, however, didn’t move. He had never walked in his whole life. He didn’t know how to walk. So Peter decided to take matters into his own hands and he took him by the stretched out right hand and lifted him up.

And immediately his feet and ankle bones received strength (3:4-7). The genuine gift of healing, in contrast to the alleged “healings” of today, resulted in immediate cures. Our Lord’s healings were instantaneous (Matthew 8:13; Mark 5:29; Luke 5:13, 17:14; John 5:9), there was no gradual process involved. Scripture knows nothing of “progressive healings.” The beggar did not need to be “taught” how to walk. He received his coordination and balance instantly. God still heals today in response to the prayers of His children, when consistent with His will (to see a short testimony about healing from Joni Eareckson-Tada click here). Not every believer at that time had the power to do miracles. Contrary to the teaching of many today, the Messianic community was not a miracle-working community. Rather, it was a Messianic community with miracle-working apostles.⁶⁶

So, he, leaping up, stood and walked and entered the Court of the Women with them (3:8). This was an outstanding fulfillment of the Messianic prophecy: Then the lame will leap like a deer (Isaiah 35:6). Before, as the lame beggar, he sat at the Beautiful Gate. Day after day he sat there at the threshold to the place of worship unable to go in. He was lame, blemished, and denied access to the inner courts (Lev 21:17-20; 2 Sam 5:8). Now, he had not only received physical healing, but spiritual acceptance as well. For the first time he was deemed worthy to enter the House of Worship. This theme will be repeated in the book of Acts. Those who were rejected as unworthy for worship under the Dispensation of Torah, would find full acceptance in the name of the risen Lord, whether a lame beggar, an Ethiopian eunuch, a woman, or a Gentile.⁶⁷

He was walking, leaping, and praising God. Like a child with a new toy, he could not resist using his new-found ability. His joy knew no bounds. He had never done this before. And all the people saw him walking and praising God. Then they knew that it was he, the lame man, who sat begging alms at the Beautiful Gate of the Temple; and they were filled with wonder and amazement as they began to fully realize what had happened to him (3:9-10). The sight of the once lame man walking and praising God was proof to all the people that he had been truly healed. He was such a well-known figure after his years of begging that there could be no doubt about his identity and therefore about the reality of his healing.⁶⁸ As a result, the word spread rapidly in the Temple Compound and a crowd gathered.

Had Peter not performed the miracle of healing the lame man, he would have had little or no audience. At Shavu’ot the Church was born. A new era had come (see the commentary on Hebrews, to see link click Bp – The Dispensation of Grace), and YHVH gave miraculous abilities to His apostles to help them proclaim their message. According to the Scriptures, those who possessed the miraculous gifts could use them at will. Contemporary “healers,” for example, do not heal at will. They are forced to dodge the difficulty by saying, “It’s not my doing, it’s the Lord’s.” Thus God – or the person seeking healing – is blamed for their repeated failures. If they could really heal, why aren’t they clearing out hospital wings?

There is an obvious attempt by Luke to parallel the miracles of Peter and Paul in the book of Acts. For example, both heal people, both raise the dead, both exhibit supernatural knowledge, both being miraculously released from prison, both perform punitive miracles, and the like. This does not happen by accident, for Luke wishes to present Peter and Paul as being on a rather equal plane in terms of their authority and power, and thus in terms of witness and success of their respective ministries.⁶⁹

A Closer Look at Miracles in Acts: In fact, we can see that the same six characteristics of the miracles and healing done by Messiah also characterize the apostles’ healing. They healed with a word or a touch (9:32-35, 28:8), they healed instantly (3:2-8), they healed totally (9:34), they were able to heal anyone (5:12-16, 28:9), they healed organic disease from birth (3:2-8, 28:8) and they raised the dead. In 9:36-42 we learn that Peter brought Dorcus (Tabitha) back to life. Note especially verse 42: This became known all over Joppa, and many people believed in the Lord. Again we see a miracle giving credence and impact to the gospel message. In 20:9-12 a young man named Eutychus died in a fall; however, Paul brought him back to life. Do you know of any person who claims to have the gift of healing raise anyone from the dead lately? I didn’t think so. Despite all the claims being made today, no one is exhibiting those six traits in any healing ministry.

Most biblical miracles performed by men happened in three relatively brief periods of Bible history: in the days of Moses and Joshua, during the ministries of Elijah and Elisha, and in the time of Messiah and the apostles (a fourth period of miracles yet to come is described in the book of Revelation). None of these periods lasted much more than a hundred years. Each of them saw a proliferation of miracles unheard of in other eras. Even during those three time periods, however, miracles were not exactly happening every day. The miracles that happened involved men who were extraordinary messengers from God.

Aside from those three periods of time God, Himself, continued to perform sign miracles in isolated events, because that is His nature. In the days of Isaiah, for example, ADONAI supernaturally defeated the Sennacherib’s army (see the commentary on Isaiah Gw – Then the Angel of the LORD Put To Death a Hundred and Eighty Five Thousand Men in the Assyrian Camp), then He healed Hezekiah and turned the sun’s shadows back (see the commentary on Isaiah Gy – Hezekiah Became Ill and Was at the Point of Death). In the days of Dani’el, God preserved Hananiah, Azariah and Mishael in the fiery furnace (Dani’el 3:20-26). But once again, God, and not men, performed those miracles.

A look into the TaNaKh reveals that aside from those already mentioned – Moses, Joshua, Elijah and Elisha – the only person who routinely performed supernatural feats was Samson. As miracle workers go, Samson was an exception in almost every category. He taught no great truth; in fact, he was neither a preacher nor a teacher. He was unfaithful and immoral. His only role seems to have been the preservation of Isra’el, and his power was given to him specifically for that task. No one else in recorded history displayed physical power like his.

Of course YHVH can interject Himself into the stream of history supernaturally any time He wants. But the LORD chose to limit Himself primarily to these three periods of biblical miracles, with very rare supernatural displays in between. The rest of the time God directs the course of human events to fulfill the purposes that He has in mind.

At least three characteristics of miracles in Scripture help us understand why ADONAI has worked the way He has. First, miracles introduced new eras of revelation. All three periods of miracles were in times when God had His revelation written in substantial quantities. Those doing the miracles were essentially the same ones heralding a new era of revelation. Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible. Elijah and Elisha introduced the prophetic age. And the apostles wrote nearly all of the B’rit Chadashah.

Second, miracles authenticated the messengers of revelation. All the miracles served an important purpose. They were not simply divine exhibitionism; they substantiated and authenticated the prophets’ claim that they spoke for Ha’Shem. For example, Moses’ miracles confirmed first to Pharaoh, and then to the Israelites, the he spoke for God. Moses and Joshua, Elijah and Elisha, and Messiah and the apostles all had the ability to do frequent signs and wonders. These were designed to convince people that YHVH was with these men and that He was speaking through them.

Third, miracles called attention to new revelation. ADONAI used miracles to get the attention of the people to whom the message was directed so that they would know for sure it was the divine LORD speaking. Then He was able to tell them what to do. Therefore, miracles have an instructive purpose that goes beyond the immediate effect of the miracle itself. For example, the miracles Moses did in Egypt were meant to enlighten both the Israelites and the Egyptians. The miracles of Elijah and Elisha were also effective in convincing both believers and unbelievers that what those men spoke was the word (Greek: rhema, meaning the spoken word) of God (First Kings 18:16-39). In the New Covenant, miracles and signs were again used to confirm believers and convince unbelievers. That is the theme of the gospel of John, which was written so that you may believe that Yeshua is the Messiah, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name (John 20:31). The miracles and signs of Jesus were recorded so that unbelieving people might believe. The same was true of the apostles (see At – Ananias and Sapphira Lie to the Ruach). When the TaNaKh and the B’rit Chadashah were completed, God’s revelation was finished (see the commentary on Hebrews Ai – The Superiority of Messiah to the Prophets). Through many signs, wonders, and miracles, God authenticated His book.

The gift of healing was one of the miraculous sign gifts given to help the messianic Community confirm the authority of the gospel message in the early years of the Church. Once the Word of God was complete with the book of Revelation in about 95 or 96 AD, the signs ceased. They were no longer needed. The apostles used healing only as a powerful sign to convince people of the validity of the gospel message.

In Philippians 2:25-27 Paul mentioned his good friend Ephpropditus, who had been very sick. Paul had previously displayed the gift of healing. Why didn’t Paul simply heal his friend? Because Paul refused to pervert the gift by using it for his own ends. That would have been beyond the purpose of the gift of healing. The gift was not given to keep believers healthy. It was a sign to unbelievers to convince them that the gospel was divine truth. We find a similar case in Second Timothy 4:20, where Paul mentioned that he had left Trophimus sick at Miletus. Why should Paul leave one of his good friends sick? Why didn’t he heal him? Once again, because that was not the purpose of the gift of healing (also see 1 Timothy 5:23 and 2 Cor 12:7b).

Healing was a miraculous sign gift to be used for special purposes. It was not intended as a permanent way to keep believers in perfect health. Yet today most charismatics teach that God wants every believer to be healthy. If that is true, why does Ha’Shem allow believers to get sick in the first place?

In a world were believers are subject to the consequences of sin, why should we assume that suffering is excluded? If every believer were well and healthy, if perfect health were a guaranteed benefit of salvation, millions of people would be stampeding to the saved – but for the wrong reason. God wants people to come to Him in repentance for sin, and for His glory, not because they see Him as a panacea for their physical ills.⁷⁰

Yes, God still heals today. But He heals according to His own sovereign will and in His own timing. Sometimes we can’t figure out why He allows believers to get sick or even die at what seems to us to be an untimely death. That’s where faith comes in. We have to trust that ADONAI loves us and for now we see only a reflection as in a mirror. But eventually we will see God face to face and then everything will be made clear to us. Now we know in part; then we shall know fully (First Corinthians 13:12).

The New Covenant Community Begins
2: 42-47

30 AD
About this time, Yeshua was crucified under Pontius Pilate. In addition, the resurrection appearances, Shavu’ot, the initial growth of the Messianic community in and around Yerushalayim are in view.

The new covenant community begins DIG: What do these 3,000 converts end up doing? How is God with them? What were the primary characteristics of this first Messianic community? How do you define the success of a messianic synagogue or church? Compare your definition with the priorities of the Messianic community in Yerushalayim.

REFLECT: How is your church or Messianic synagogue like and unlike the New Covenant community here? How does this make you feel? What could you do to help your place of worship be more like this? How will this example affect how you pray for your church or Messianic synagogue?

This is a summary statement that prepares us for what is to follow. These summary statements in Acts can be seen in four places (here, 4:32-37; 5:12-16 and 8:1b-4). It is important to distinguish between summary statements and transitions statements. Summary statements only occur in the first eight chapters of Acts beginning here, and transitions statements occur in various places throughout the book. The epistles of the New Covenant shape the doctrine for the life of the Church. Acts traces the application of that doctrine in the history of the early Messianic community.

The Messianic community started in Yerushalayim. Their evangelism (to see link click An – Peter Speaks to the Shavu’ot Crowd) was followed by discipleship which was not merely an emotional response based upon what Peter said. The fact of their real faith was that they continued in the faith. The discipleship continued in four areas:

They were devoting themselves to the teaching of the apostles, solid doctrinal teaching, foundational to the growth and spiritual health of every messianic synagogue or church. To the Jewish mind Torah (Hebrew: meaning teaching or instruction) is not something dead, and fixed in stone, but a living teaching to be applied to the daily lives of the individual (see the commentary on Exodus Dj – The Ten Commandments). At this point the apostles were only teaching orally. Later their inspired words would be written down in the B’rit Chadashah.

And to fellowship (Greek: koinonia meaning sharing in common). They were sharing spiritual blessings and material blessings. As believers today we share the same Lord Jesus; we share the same Scriptures (the blueprint for living); we share the same love for God; we share the same desire to worship Him, we share the same struggles, we share the same victories, we share the same ministry of living for ADONAI, and we share the same joy of communicating the gospel to others.⁵⁴

For a believer to fail to participate in the life of the local messianic synagogue or church is inexcusable (except for extreme physical limitations). In fact, those who choose to isolate themselves are disobedient to the direct command of Scripture: Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encourage one another – and all the more as you see the Day of the Lord approaching (Hebrews 10:25). The Bible does not envision spiritual “lone-wolves” living apart from other believers. All members of the Universal Church made up of both Jews and Gentiles (Ephesians 2:14), the body of Messiah, are to be actively and intimately involved in their local place of worship.⁵⁵ How can you use your spiritual gift(s) if you have no association with other believers?

And to breaking bread. Many assume that this refers to “taking communion” and have an image of the way it is celebrated today in most churches. But the context here is first-century Judaism; and for Jews, then and now, fellowship was and is celebrated by meals. To say that the early Messianic Jews broke bread is merely to say that they ate together. The phrase breaking bread stands for the blessing over the basic food staple, the provision of which symbolizes God’s sustenance of human life. The Jewish custom of breaking, in contrast to cutting, bread appears to reflect the respect accorded bread as the “staff of life.” A minimum number of ten people was required before the full blessing could be recited – women, slaves, and minor being excluded from the number required.

There is something about eating together that makes people more open to each other. A shared meal is a context where conversation happens naturally, needs become known, and friends discover how they can serve each other.⁵⁶

And to prayers (2:42). The three thousand new converts needed instruction in the Word and fellowship with God’s people if they were to grow and become effective witnesses. The new covenant community did more than make converts – they also made disciples (Matthew 28:19-20).⁵⁷

Fear (Greek: phabos, meaning awe, or holy terror related to the sense of divine presence) lay upon every soul, at least all the believers, but to some degree it probably affected all of Jerusalem. This is the afterglow of Shavu’ot. And many signs and wonders were happening through the apostles (2:43). At this point only the apostles performed the signs and wonders (3:1-10, 5:12 and 15-16, 9:32-35 and 40-42). Anyone who is not an apostle who performed signs and wonders in the book of Acts did so because an apostle gave them the authority to do it. These were not things done generally by all believers. Performing signs and wonders were essential in the early days of the Messianic community because they had no B’rit Chadashah to quote as authoritative. The Scriptures were written later beyond these events.

Since many of the first believers were visitors from other countries who had not come to Yerushalayim prepared to take up permanent residence there, an immediate need arose for those with local property and resources to use them to care for their new brothers and sisters in Messiah.⁵⁸ And all who believed were together, having everything in common. They began selling their property and possessions as was needed and sharing them with all, as any had need (2:44-45). The evidence of Acts suggests that considerable numbers of the early community possessed sufficient property and possessions to ensure that the community as a whole was well provided for. The social composition of the early community probably reflected that of Jerusalem’s population in general. While perhaps not to be numbered among the wealthy elite, such as the high-priestly Sadducees, the community in Jerusalem does appear to have included several well-to-do members.⁵⁹

It is important to note that the sharing of property and possessions was voluntary. According to verse 46 they broke bread in their homes. So, evidently many still had homes; not all had sold them. It is also noteworthy that the tense of both verbs in verse 45 is imperfect, which indicates that the selling and the giving were occasional, in response to particular needs, not once and for all. As Peter points out later (see At – Ananias and Sapphira Lie to the Ruach), Ananias could have done anything he wanted to with his land, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Ruach ha-Kodesh and keep back part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold, it was your own, wasn’t it? There was no obligation to sell it. And after it was sold, wasn’t it at your disposal? He could have given it all, or given only a part of it.

As a result, we shouldn’t regard this as “early communism,” because it was voluntary, temporary, and flawed. Therefore, this practice was very short-lived and did not continue beyond the fifth chapter of Acts. It ended up not being such a great thing because once what they had was sold, they became a poverty-stricken community and needed help from other Gentile congregations of God to survive later on (First Corinthians 16:1-4; Second Corinthians 8:1-9:15; Galatians 2:10; Romans 15:25-31).

Day-by-day they continued with one mind, spending time at the Temple and breaking bread from house to house. They met in the Temple for worship, but did not participate in the Levitical sacrificial system because it was no longer needed as Messiah was now their perfect sacrifice (see the commentary on Hebrews Bv – The Superiority of Messiah’s Sacrifice). They met daily (2:46), cared daily (6:1-5), won souls daily (2:47), searched the Scriptures daily (17:11), and increased in number daily (16:5). Their newfound faith was a day-by-day reality, not a once a week routine. Why? Because the risen Messiah was a living reality to them, and His resurrection power was at work in their lives through the Spirit of God.

This was a concept already embedded in the Jewish community with the havurah, which is a community. They initially met in the Temple compound, at this time they saw no contradiction with meeting there and their new faith in Messiah.  Their presence in the Temple testified not only to their remaining faithful to their Jewish roots, but also demonstrated their zeal for witnessing to their unbelieving Israelites. But while they met to worship in the Temple compound, they broke bread at home. This is the communal meal with which the havurah meal would end. They were sharing meals with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. They were not excluded from the Jewish community and they continued to grow, every day the Lord was adding to their number those being saved (2:46-47). Once again, Luke refers to the process of becoming a believer as being saved. In this context, being saved is different from being associated with Pharisaic Judaism, who were under God’s judgment for their rejection of Messiah (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lq – Jesus Sentenced to Be Crucified). This is the climax of the picture painted here.

Because of the believers’ Ruach ha-Kodesh-empowered obedience to the Torah as taught by the apostles, God blessed the Messianic community with growth in the numbers of those truly saved. This was a Jewish movement, the first Gentiles without a prior “Jewish connection” do not join the Messianic community until Chapter 10.⁶⁰

There is no need for us to wait, as the one-hundred-and-twenty had to wait, for the Spirit to come. For the Ruach ha-Kodesh did come on Shavu’ot, and has never left His righteous ones. Our responsibility is to humble ourselves before His sovereign authority, to determine not to quench Him, but to allow Him His freedom in our lives. For then our messianic synagogues and churches will display those marks of the Spirit’s presence, namely, biblical teaching, loving fellowship, living worship and an ongoing, outgoing evangelism.⁶¹

Peter Speaks to the Shavu’ot Crowd
The Jews are Saved Through the Preaching of Peter
2: 14-41

30 AD
About this time, Yeshua was crucified under Pontius Pilate. In addition, the resurrection appearances, Shavu’ot, the initial growth of the Messianic community in and around Yerushalayim are in view.

Peter speaks to the Shavu’ot crowd DIG: Compare Peter and the other apostles in John 18:25-27 and 20:19 with their actions here. What accounts for the great difference? How do you see Luke 24:44-49 reflected in this proclamation? Given the audience, why would Peter us so many quotes from the TaNaKh? What is the point Peter wants people to understand about current events (2:13, 17-18)? Since the prophets used dramatic figurative language to indicate YHVH was going to deal with His people in a new way, how do you understand verses 19-21? What tells you Joel’s prophecy is coming true today? How familiar were these people with the events of Yeshua’s life? How might they be dealing with the rumors of an empty tomb? Why does Peter emphasize the resurrection in verses 24, 31-32)?

REFLECT: To repent and be baptized in Yeshua’s name meant to turn away from all other loyalties and affirm allegiance to Him as not only your Savior, but also your Lord. In what ways does that call still present a challenge to you? How have you experienced the reality of God’s promises to those who answer that call? From Peter’s proclamation, what facts about Yeshua would be key to non-believers to understand? When were you saved? Who was influential in that process? What convinced you of your need for Him? What difference does it make to you that Christ really is the reigning King over all? How does that truth impact your daily life? In Chapter 2, what was the apostles’ part and God’s part in this witnessing for Messiah? When was the last time you seized an opportunity to witness for Jesus? What happened? How are you like Peter? Unlike him? What encourages you as you read the words that Peter spoke?

The assembled crowd (to see link click Al – The Ruach ha-Kodesh Comes at Shavu’ot) provided Peter with his opportunity to explain the significance of what was happening. His speech begins with an allusion of the pouring out of the Ruach as the fulfilment of prophecy from Joel 2:17-21 LXX (Septuagint). Peter begins his quote from the prophet Joel with, “And it shall be in the last days,” says God, “that I will pour out My Rauch on all flesh . . .” Then he transitions from the gift of the Spirit back to the point of connection: Yeshua Messiah ha-Natzrati. The Lord’s resurrection is not argued for by Peter, he merely proclaims it as fact.

Peter had been the acknowledged leader and often the spokesman for the apostles during Messiah’s earthly ministry. Standing with the Eleven, he addressed the critics who said the righteous of the TaNaKh speaking in other languages were drunk. Raising his voice so the huge crowd could hear him, he declared with no hesitation in his heart: Fellow Judeans and all who are staying in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and pay attention to my words. These men are not drunk, as you suppose – for it’s only the third hour of the day. It was only nine o’clock in the morning, which was the hour of prayer. And because it was Shavu’ot it was also the time for the regular morning sacrifice, to be followed by the special Shavu’ot sacrifice. Furthermore, the Jewish custom was to drink wine in the evening (2:14-15)! His address was respectful, yet firm.

But this is what was spoken about through the prophet Joel (2:16): Nothing that Joel prophesied happened in Acts 2, and what happened in Acts 2 isn’t even mentioned in Joel 2. Joel doesn’t mention the speaking in languages whatsoever. He does, however, deal with the pouring out of the Ruach ha-Kodesh on all Isra’el in the last days. He deals with the national regeneration of Isra’el at the end of the Great Tribulation before the establishment of the messianic Kingdom (see the commentary on Revelation Ev – The Basis for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ). Consequently, this was not a fulfillment of Joel 2, however the one point of similarity between Joel 3:1-2 and Acts 2 is the outpouring of the Spirit of God. Thus Peter was telling the skeptics in the audience what the Spirit of God could do!

And it shall be in the last days, says God,
‘that I will pour out My Ruach on all [Jewish] flesh.
Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
your young men shall see visions,
and your old men shall dream dreams.
Even on My slaves, male and female,
I will pour out My Ruach in those days,
and they shall prophesy.
And I will give wonders in the sky above
and signs on the earth beneath –
blood, and fire, and smoky vapor.
The sun shall be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the great and glorious Day of YHVH comes. After hearing Peter quote Joel’s description of the Day of the Lord was terrifying and the crowd would naturally want to know how to avoid being caught in that time of terror and devastation. Peter then delivers the climax of his quote from Joel, “And it shall be that everyone who calls on the name of Adonai shall be saved” (2:17-21 LXX). Luke quotes the TaNaKh almost always in a form either corresponding to the LXX or close to it, and not according to the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Here Joel 3:1-5a is quoted close but not exactly corresponding to the LXX.⁴⁵

The First Coming of Christ ushered in the last days. First John 2:18a says: Dear children, this is the last hour. Peter writes that Messiah was revealed in these last times for your sake (First Peter 1:20). The writer to the Hebrews informs us in these last days God has spoken to us by His Son (Hebrews 1:2), and now He has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of Himself (9:26b). Therefore, the last days have lasted about two thousand years. During this time Ha’Shem has graciously called the Goyim to salvation and continued to shepherd Isra’el. The complete fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy awaits the messianic Kingdom.

Then Peter describes to his hearers exactly who that Savior is and what He requires for salvation. Men of Isra’el, hear these words! Yeshua ha-Natzrati – a Man authenticated to you by God with mighty deeds and wonders and signs God performed through Him in your midst, as you yourselves know – this Yeshua, given over by God’s predetermined plan and foreknowledge, nailed to the cross by the hand of Pharisees and Sadducees . . . lawless men. Even if all Isra’el had accepted Jesus as the Messiah, He still would have died, probably at the hands of the Romans for insurrection. The death of Messiah was part of the divine plan. But there was a human side of Jesus’ death, and Peter said to those Jews gathered in the Temple compound, “You killed Him!” However, God raised Him up, releasing Him from the birth pains of death, He was born out of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held by it (2:22-24). Like a knife, the accusation pierced their hearts, as it does today when any Jew is told, “You Jews killed Jesus!” However, Peter’s true charge to the listeners and the false charge against the Jewish people today are worlds apart. This verse places the responsibility squarely where it belongs – not resting solely on the Jews, but being part of God’s plan. David says about Him,

‘I saw Adonai always before me,
for He is at my right hand so that I might not be shaken.
Therefore my heart was glad and my tongue rejoiced;
moreover, my body also will live in hope,
because You will not abandon my soul to Sh’ol
or let Your Holy One see decay.
You have made known to me the paths of life;
You will fill me with joy in Your presence (2:25-28 LXX).’
Luke quotes Psalm 16:8-11ab verbatim from the LXX.⁴⁶ Even the rabbis took Psalm 16 to be a messianic Psalm. The Midrash on Psalm 16:9 quotes it as meaning, “My glory rejoices over King Messiah” because after death, then comes the resurrection and be able to walk in the paths of life.

“Brothers, fellow Jews, I can confidently tell you that the patriarch David died and was buried – his tomb is with us to this day. So Peter could not have been speaking of David. Then whom was he speaking? David was a prophet and knew God had sworn with an oath to him to seat one of his descendants on His throne. This basis of the promises to David was his covenant with God (see the commentary on the Life of David Cu – ADONAI Swore an Oath to David) David was a prophet as well as a king and he saw beforehand and spoke of Messiah’s resurrection – that He was not abandoned to Sh’ol, and His body did not see decay. That was true of the Messiah; however, it is not true of David (2:29-31). Thus, Psalm 16 is not speaking about David, but speaking of David’s descendent . . . the resurrected Messiah.

This Yeshua God raised up – we all are witnesses! Therefore, being exalted to the right hand of God and receiving from the Father the promise of the Ruach ha-Kodesh (1:4), He poured out this – what you now see and hear (2:32-33). For David did not ascend into the heavens; yet he himself says:
The LORD said to my Lord (Greek: kurios),
“Sit at my right hand,
until I make Your enemies a footstool
for Your feet” (2:34-35 LXX).
Luke quotes the messianic Psalm 110:1 verbatim from the LXX.⁴⁷
The point Peter wanted to make from this quotation, was that David didn’t ascend into heaven. Not only was there no resurrection of David, there was no ascension either. So David’s Lord had to be Messiah.

Peter had provided overwhelming evidence form Jesus’ life, death, resurrection and ascension that He is indeed Isra’el’s long-awaited Messiah. Then he drew his sermon to a powerful conclusion with these ringing words: Therefore let the whole house of Isra’el know for certain (Greek: asphalos, meaning that which is beyond any doubt) that God has made Him – this Yeshua whom you had crucified – both Lord and Messiah (2:36)! The verdict was in, and they were on the wrong side, guilty of opposing God and rejecting their Messiah. As Peter would later put it: This Yeshua, the one you have crucified, He is “the stone – rejected by you – that has become the chief cornerstone.”

A closer look at the speeches in Acts: Some have a problem trying to explain how Luke could explain the copious speech material in Acts, at least most of which Luke was surely not present to hear. If one takes into account all the discourse material, the speeches in Acts make up 365 verses out of about 1,000, meaning over one-third of the book is made up of speeches. But how could Luke know what went on behind closed doors? We know that Joseph of Arimathea was both a believer and a member of the Great Sanhedrin (Mark 15:43). Nicodemus, also a believer, was probably in the Sanhedrin also (John 7:50). Luke carefully investigated everything from the beginning (Luke 1:3), and would have consulted them or other Sanhedrin members who came to faith later on. Lastly, we should not minimize the ministry of the Spirit of God as He inspires the human authors to write down what otherwise could not have been known from any human source. Moshe wasn’t there when the universe was created (Genesis 1:1 to 2:3), however, we don’t doubt his account!

The following shows the distribution of the major speeches in Acts: Eight speeches by Peter: Acts Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 11 and 13; two speeches by James: Acts Chapters 15 and 21; one speech by Stephen in Acts Chapter 7 and nine speeches by Paul: Acts Chapters 13, 14, 17, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26 and 28. Four speeches by non-believers: Acts 5:35-39 by Gamaliel; Acts 19:35-40 by a town clerk in Ephesus; Acts 24:2-8 by a lawyer named Tertullus; Acts 25:14-21 and 24-27 a recapitulation by Festus.⁴⁸ This last example, a private discussion between Festus and Agrippa in Acts 25, is not the sort of material that Luke would likely have had access to. Therefore, we must conclude that the Ruach ha-Kodesh inspired the human author to record it as written.

These speeches give us a general sense of what was said. They were too short to be transcripts because many of these speeches probably lasted an hour or two. So they are not quoted verbatim. The best way to characterize them would be expert summaries. We must also keep in mind that people of that time were more oriented to oral learning.

The result of Peter’s speech. Peter’s conclusion to the main body of his speech was devastating. Now when they heard Peter’s charge that they had crucified the Messiah, they were cut to the heart. Overcome with grief and remorse, they said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Fellow brethren, what shall we do (2:37)?” Peter said, “I’m glad you asked,” and addressed them, saying: Repent. The Greek word means to change one’s mind. But change their minds about what? To change their minds about Jesus . . . that Jesus was not demon-possessed (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ek – It is only by Beelzebub, the Prince of Demons, That This Fellow Drives Out Demons), which was the basis of His rejection, but that He really was the Messiah. Now this generation to whom Peter was speaking had committed the unpardonable sin of rejecting the Holy Spirit and under divine judgment, and their judgment would be soon enough (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Mt – The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple on Tisha B’Av in 70 AD). Though nationally that sin was unpardonable, however, individually, they could be pardoned spiritually, but only after they repented of their sins, or changed their minds about Jesus, and believed that He was the Messiah. The Good News that God forgives makes sense only against the background of the bad news that we have sinned grievously.

In believers’ immersion, we identify ourselves with the death, burial and resurrection of Yeshua. Now repentance demands the witness of immersion. Peter’s audience need to change their identification to change their association. However, because of the unforgiveable sin (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Em – Whoever Blasphemes Against the Holy Spirit Will Never Be Forgiven), this generation was under physical judgment (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ej – The Point of No Return for Isra’el). And until 70 AD the only way Jewish believers could hope to escape the physical judgment was to change their identification and separate from Judaism. And that break came, then as it is today, with water immersion. It is an outward sign of an inward conviction. Then they would escape the coming Roman tsunami.

That is why immersion is so closely identified with salvation. That is why Peter could say: Let each of you be immersed in the name of Messiah Yeshua (not the in the name of Moses, not in the name of the priesthood), because you are adding the name of Yeshua to your faith for the removal of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Ruach ha-Kodesh. For the promise is for you (Jews) and your children, and for all who are far away – as many as Adonai our God calls to Himself (2:38-39). The Jews had two different types of immersion. First there is proselyte immersion. When Gentiles converted to Judaism they were fully immersed in water, changing their association. They were no longer identified with paganism, but with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the Jewish people. Then there was the immersion of John, and those identifying themselves with his back to God message. This immersion was to be in the name of Messiah Yeshua, this was the new association. It would separate them from proselyte immersion and John’s back to God immersion.

Peter’s description of those who would receive the Ruach as those Adonai our God calls to Himself (2:39) describes God’s sovereignty at work in salvation. It presents the necessary balance to the statement in 2:21 that everyone who calls on the name of Adonai shall be saved (2:21 LXX). A biblical view of salvation does not exclude either human responsibility or divine sovereignty, but allows them to remain in tension. We must not resist the attempt to harmonize what Scripture does not, and be content in the knowledge that there is no ultimate contradiction in God’s mind.⁴⁹ Like the Trinity, this is an antinomy, meaning two things that seem to be contradictory, however both are true. God is three Persons, yet He is One (Deuteronomy 6:4); and God choses us before the creation of the world (Ephesians 1:4), yet we have to make a decision to accept Yeshua as Messiah or not – we have free will. We can say no to God and make it stick. This is an antimony.

But Peter does not say that immersion will save them spiritually. The Bible consistently teaches that salvation is always through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9). To the Jews to whom he was speaking, repentance would save them spiritually, and immersion would save them physically because it would separate them from the cursed generation of that day. Then Luke summarizes Peter’s sermon, which was probably much longer than what is written here. With many other words he warned them and kept urging them, saying: Save yourselves from this twisted generation of the unpardonable sin (2:40)!⁵⁰

So those who received his message were immersed, and that day about three thousand souls were added (2:41). Some object to keep statistics on how many people came to trust Yeshua and join congregation of believers. Ha’Shem thinks otherwise. In the book of Acts Luke traces the growth of the Messianic Community from at least 120 (1:14) to some 3,120 (here). About five thousand men, not counting the women and children, were added soon after (4:4). Some twenty years later there were many tens of thousands . . . among the Judeans of Jerusalem alone (20:21). Besides these statistics we read that the Lord added to their number daily (2:47), the number of disciples was growing (6:1), their numbers kept multiplying (6:7), and a great number of people trusted and turned to the Lord (11:21). Moreover, Luke takes note of key subgroups: a large number of priests became obedient to the faith (6:7), and some of those who came to believer were from the party of the Pharisees (15:5). The data imply that the early Jewish evangelism was successful. A genuine movement arose in which hundreds of thousands of Jews came to faith in Yeshua the Jewish Messiah and it was still going on at the close of the book of Acts (28:24-25).⁵¹

A closer look at the keys to the Kingdom: At Caesarea Philippi Peter declared that Yeshua was the Messiah, the Son of the living God. In response, Jesus said: I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Fx – On This Rock I Will Build My Church). Whenever the words key or keys is used symbolically in the Bible, it always symbolizes the authority to open or close doors (Judges 3:25; First Chronicles 9:27; Isaiah 22:20-24; Matthew 16:19a; Revelation 1:18, 3:7, 9:1 and 20:1). Peter will be responsible to open the doors of the Church. He has a special role in the book of Acts. In the Dispensation of the Torah, humanity was divided into two groups, Jews and Gentiles. But in the Dispensation of Grace, because of what went on in the intertestamental period, there were three groups of people, Jews, Gentiles and Samaritans (Matthew 10:5-6). Peter would be the key person (pun intended) in bringing in the Jews (Acts 2), the Samaritans (Acts 8), and the Gentiles (Acts 10) into the Church by receiving the Holy Spirit. Once he opened the door it stayed open.

As we proceed through the book of Acts we will be comparing the way salvation comes to the Jews, the Samaritans and the Gentiles, showing, as was the case with the way Yeshua healed, there is no set order in the book of Acts. This is a transitional book and a historical book, and you can’t establish doctrine based upon history. You base doctrine on theological statements in the epistles. Historical facts can illustrate the doctrine but they cannot develop doctrine on their own.

The gift of languages (tongues) can be seen four times in the book, Acts 2, Acts 8, Acts 10 and Acts 19. There is not set order leading up to immersion by the Spirit and subsequent speaking in tongues. Here in Acts 2 with salvation coming to the Jews, the order was first repentance, then water immersion, and then receiving Spirit immersion by the Ruach ha-Kodesh as evidenced by speaking in languages. Again, you don’t build doctrine on history. Keep this order in mind and we will see how it was different with the Samaritans, the Gentiles and John’s disciples.

To understand the differences in the four appearances of languages in Acts, we will ask six questions as we come to each passage. However, the one key common element in all four cases is that languages (ie tongues) are for the purpose of authentification.

1. Who received it? Some feel that in Act 2:1-13, all those in the upper room were speaking in foreign languages. However contextually, it’s more likely that only the twelve apostles received the gift because in 2:1 you have the words they and all, they were all together in one place. But the antecedent (in Greek grammar you go back to the nearest antecedent) to they and all in 2:1 is 1:26, which in this case it is Matthias and the eleven apostles, not the one hundred and twenty. This view is reinforced in 2:7 where it describes those speaking in languages, “Aren’t all of these who are speaking Galileans?” It is not likely that all one hundred and twenty were Galileans. In addition, in 2:14 it only mentions Peter and the Eleven and not the others. So who received it, most likely, only the Twelve. However, we can’t be dogmatic about it. If all one hundred and twenty received the gift of languages it wouldn’t change anything.

2. What were they? They were apostles (1:26; 2:14), which makes them a separate category from the other believers. The apostles were sent by Yeshua for a special ministry – to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. The apostles were the foundation of the Church with Messiah Himself being the chief cornerstone (Ephesians 2:20). Peter, for example, had the keys to the Kingdom (see above). He had the authority to open the door for all three main ethnic groups at that time (Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles). And the gift of languages was used to authenticate his calling, his office, and his message.

3. What were the circumstances? They were praying and waiting for the promise of the Father (1:4). They experienced the answer to that prayer when the Ruach ha-Kodesh was poured out on the apostles on Shavu’ot (2:33).

4. What was the means? The means was direct. No laying on of hands. It was the initial filling of the Ruach ha-Kodesh to have the ability to speak in other languages that were previously not known to them.

5. What was the purpose in this context? The purpose was authentification in two ways. For the apostles, it authenticated that the promise of the Father had come. For the Jewish audience, it authenticated the message of the apostles. They were convinced that Jesus was the Messiah because they saw and experienced something supernatural.

6. What were the results? There were three results. First, the Jews of the Diaspora were able to understand the gospel in their own language (2:8-11). The second result was conviction (2:37). The third result was the salvation of three thousand Jews (2:41).⁵²

Peter spoke about the Good News of Yeshua Messiah and that day about three thousand souls were added (2:41). In a very special way, those Jewish believers were the first fruits in fulfillment of Shavu’ot. James, in his book specifically written to Jewish believers (James 1:1), said: God chose to give us (spiritual) birth through (the preaching of the gospel) the word of truth, that we might be a kind of first fruits of all he created (James 1:18).

Therefore, looking at the big picture, it’s important for you to understand that as believers, we write the Good News with our lives. Many of your friends or acquaintances don’t read the Good News. They don’t know Joshua from Isaiah or from Matthew. But they are watching you because you say that you follow Yeshua. They listen to what you say and they watch what you do. They see if the Good News makes any difference in your life. And if you act the say way that they act. If you talk the same way that they talk. Or if you go to the same movies that they go to. They have no interest in this “Yeshua” thing. So how is your writing going these days? Salvation is not knowing about Yeshua, it’s knowing Yeshua.

The theme of Shavu’ot can best be summed up by the word revival. Isra’el was called to praise ADONAI for the first fruits of the ground when they celebrated Sfirat ha-Omer, knowing that those early fruits assured the latter harvest of Shavu’ot. This also applies to the Kingdom of God. The first fruits of the believers at Shavu’ot virtually guaranteed a revival in the latter-day spiritual harvest of Messiah. Now we can understand why YHVH in the three required pilgrim festivals for every Jewish male. As the Passover speaks of redemption, Shavu’ot speaks of revival, especially during the Dispensation of Grace (see the commentary on Hebrews Bp – The Dispensation of Grace). The message of Shavu’ot is one of great hope and joy. May the day come when the Ruach ha-Kodesh will be poured out upon the house of David, and they will look, in faith, to the One who was pierced (Zechariah 12:10).⁵³

The Dispensation of Grace
Acts 2:1 to Revelation 19:21

The basis for this material comes from Arnold Fruchtenbaum,
Ariel Ministries, San Antonio, Texas

One of the most important things in understanding the Bible is rightly dividing the word of truth (Second Timothy 2:15 NJK). There are a number of ways we can divide the Bible to understand the different parts of the whole. One of the ways is by the dispensations contained in God’s Word. To understand what a dispensation is, we need to take a look at two Greek words. The first word is oikumenei from which we get our English word ecumenical. It means to manage, to regulate, to administer, or to plan. The second word is aion and it means age. It emphasizes the time element of the dispensation. So the term dispensation refers to a specific way by which God administers His program, His will, His rule and His authority. Each dispensation is an age, because each dispensation covers a period of time. Dispensations are periods of time in which God governs in a different way than He did previously.

There are seven dispensations described in the Bible: (1) the Dispensation of Innocence or Freedom (Genesis 1:28 to 3:5); (2) the Dispensation of Conscience or Self-Determination (Genesis 3:6 to 8:14), (3) the Dispensation of Civil Government (Genesis 8:15 to 11:32), (4) the Dispensation of Promise or Patriarchal Rule (Genesis 12:1 to Exodus 18:27), (5) the Dispensation of Torah (Exodus 19:1 to Acts 1:26), (6) the Dispensation of Grace (Acts 2:1 to Revelation 19:21), and (7) the Dispensation of the messianic or millennial Kingdom (Isaiah 4:2-6, 11:1 to 12:6, 54:11-17, 60:1-22).

The sixth dispensation is called the Dispensation of Grace. While grace was evident in all other dispensations, it is in this dispensation that a very unique display of grace was manifested that was different from all former displays of grace. Concerning this dispensation, Yochanan 1:17 states: For the Torah was given through Moshe; grace and truth came through Yeshua the Messiah. Certainly, ADONAI was gracious before the coming of Jesus, for there are many evidences of YHVH’s grace throughout the pages of the TaNaKh. However, with the coming of Christ, there was a totally unique display of grace. This is why it is called the Dispensation of Grace, and it is in effect at this present time.

This dispensation extends from Acts 2:1, with the beginning of the indwelling ministry of the Ruach ha-Kodesh at Shavu’ot, through Revelation 19:21. It covers the entire period of the Church Age, and also the seven years of the Great Tribulation.

At the beginning of each dispensation there is one key person through whom God reveals the new features of that particular dispensation. The key person in the sixth dispensation was Rabbi Sha’ul, also known as the apostle Paul after his Damascus Road experience (see the commentary on Acts Bc – Sha’ul Turns from Murder to Messiah). It was Sha’ul who uniquely received the revelation concerning the Dispensation of Grace. It was no accident that he received more revelation than any other apostle. Sha’ul wrote most of the letters of the B’rit Chadashah. It was he that received that special revelation concerning the dispensation of the grace of God (Ephesians 3:2 KJV). Sha’ul, the apostle to the Goyim (Acts 22:21 and Ephesians 3:1-13), more than any other apostle, is the key person for this dispensation.

Each dispensation also had a specific responsibility. Our responsibility during the Dispensation of Grace is obedience to the Jewish New Covenant (see the commentary on Jeremiah Eo – I Will Make a New Covenant with the People of Isra’el). Obedience to the B’rit Chadashah means to accept the gift of righteousness that ADONAI offers to everyone through the Messiah of Isra’el.

Not only does each dispensation come with a responsibility, but each also comes with a test. The specific test of this dispensation is simply this: Will you accept the gift? Will humanity, as a whole, accept the LORD’s offer of the free gift of salvation by the simple act of faith in the person of Yeshua Messiah? For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast (Ephesians 2:8-9).

There will also be a failure during this dispensation. As with all the previous dispensations, the present one will also end in failure, and this can be seen in two ways. First, most will reject the free gift of salvation (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Dw – The Narrow and Wide Gates). The majority of humanity will not come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ in our own day, any more than it was true before our time. The second way that failure is going to be seen is that the very organism that has a knowledge of the truth, the unbelieving visible church, will become apostate, and will even turn away from the truth (see the commentary on Revelation Bf – The Church at Laodicea).

After the failure there is the judgment. This dispensation will also end with judgment, the judgment of the Great Tribulation (see the commentary on Isaiah Eu – The Rapture and the Great Tribulation). The Great Tribulation will fall upon the whole world in general, because humanity has failed to accept the free gift of salvation offered through Yeshua Messiah. Also, the unbelieving visible church will go into the Great Tribulation and suffer the wrath of God. But the believing invisible Church, the true believers in Jesus Christ, will be taken out of this earth before the Tribulation ever begins.

In every dispensation there is also the display of God’s grace. It is in this area that we also see the facet of grace. Grace will be seen through the Rapture of the Church in that the invisible Church, the true Body of Messiah, composed of Jews and Gentiles, all true believers, will be raptured out of this earth (see the commentary of Revelation By – The Rapture of the Church). Even for those who have died, their bodies will be resurrected, so that even their bodies will not be on this earth during the seven years of the Great Tribulation. The rapture will be a unique display of grace during the Dispensation of Grace.

The Ruach Ha’Kodesh Comes at Shavu’ot
2: 1-13

30 AD

About this time, Yeshua was crucified under Pontius Pilate. In addition, the resurrection appearances, Shavu’ot, the initial growth of the Messianic community in and around Yerushalayim are in view.

The Ruach Ha’Kodesh comes at Shavu’ot DIG: Given that Shavu’ot was a celebrative harvest festival (Deuteronomy 16:9-10), why did ADONAI choose that day to give the Ruach Ha’Kodesh? If you had been in that room, what would you have seen, heard, and felt? How far have these pilgrims come (2:9-10)? What does the word tongues mean here? Languages ecstatic utterances? What connects being filled with the Spirit and bearing witness to Jesus? If you were one of the crowd, would you respond more like those in verse 12, or those in verse 13? Why?

REFLECT: When have you experienced an empowering from ADONAI to witness about Messiah? What will you do this week to be better prepared for God’s use? Everyone is immersed with the Ruach Ha’Kodesh at the moment of salvation. It is a once in a lifetime event. But being filled with the Spirit of God should be continuous. What can you do to be filled with the Ruach?

The events of Messiah’s life, death and resurrection, according to Rabbi Sha’ul, were not done in a quiet corner (Acts 26:26), but out in the open before all people. The same could be said of the birth of the Church. It did not begin in some out of the way place. Rather, it was born with a startling, dramatic event in the very heart of Yerushalayim.³¹

Approximately ten days after Messiah’s ascension the day of Shavu’ot had come (Hebrew: The Feast of Weeks, or Greek: Pentecost). When Luke says “day,” he uses the definite article, translated “the day” of Shavu’ot, or the fulfillment of Shavu’ot, which was fulfilled by the birth of the Church. The first three thousand believers were Jewish, and the Gentile believers did not come into the picture until later (to see link click Bg – Peter Goes to the House of Cornelius). Here for the English phrase “had come,” Luke uses the very long Greek word sumplerousthai, which means, being fulfilled completely. The day didn’t merely come, that day of Shavu’ot was about to be fulfilled completely.

Because Shavu’ot recalls God’s revelation of Himself, His power and His Torah (the Hebrew word means “teaching” not “law”) to the Jewish people, the synagogue readings for this holiday include Exodus 19-20 (Moshe’s ascent of Mount Sinai and the Ten Commandments), and two passages celebrating other theophanies (appearances of God), Ezeki’el 1-2 and Habakkuk 3. In Judaism, the feast of Shavu’ot is commemorated as the time of the giving of the Torah. In Jewish tradition, that’s when the Torah was born. Now it will be celebrated as the birth of the Church. It’s called the Feast of Weeks in Hebrew because it comes seven weeks after Pesach (Passover), and it’s called Pentecost in Greek because it comes on the fiftieth day after the presentation of the firstfruits of the barley harvest.

During the Second Temple period Shavu’ot consisted of being a harvest festival for farmers. Various first fruits were brought as an offering: wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, olive oil and honey. The farmers would parade to the Temple with these firstfruits and then offer them up in a special ceremony. People would follow them blowing flutes and other musical instruments. It was quite an elaborate observance as the farmers brought their firstfruits to the Temple.

Parallels between Sinai and Shavu’ot continue: (1) At Sinai the Torah and the Ten Commandments were delivered to God’s people by the finger of God (Exodus 31:18), while at Shavu’ot the Torah was written on tablets of the heart (Second Corinthians 3:3). (2) Both took place on Shavu’ot. (3) Both were accompanied by appearances of YHVH. (4) Both were accompanied by many languages (voices, tongues). (5) At Sinai the Torah was given externally to the people as a whole, while at Yerushalayim the Torah was put within each believer. (6) At Sinai a mixed multitude (Exodus 12:38) accompanied the Israelites, just as people from many countries were present at Shavu’ot. (7) Torah means teaching, and the Ruach Ha’Kodesh is the Teacher (John 14:16, 16:26 and 16:13). (8) It is customary in the Jewish celebration of Shavu’ot to eat milk products, and the Holy Spirit provides the milk of the Word (First Peter 2:2; Hebrews 5:12-13).³²

Shavu’ot was also one of the three regalim, or Jewish “pilgrim” festivals, along with Pesach/Unleavened Bread and Sukkot (Booths), where every able-bodied man was supposed to travel to Jerusalem to celebrate annually (Exodus 23:14-17; Deuteronomy 16:16).

Ties between the large Jewish population in the Diaspora and Eretz (the Land of) Isra’el were very close in the Second Temple period, marked not only by the Diaspora’s reverence of the Oral Law (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ei – The Oral Law), but also in the sending of the half-shekel contribution to the Temple and pilgrimage to Yerushalayim. Pilgrims came from such places as Asia, Africa, Egypt, and Italy and various oral laws make it clear that, particularly at Pesach and Sukkot, people not only stayed for the duration of the festival, but they also came at least seven days earlier to purify themselves in order to enter the Temple.³³

Two other names for Shavu’ot are found in the TaNaKh; Yom-HaBikkurim (Day of the First fruits in Numbers 28:26) and Chag-HaKatzir (Feast of the Harvest in Exodus 23:16). Because it was always ADONAI’s intention to bring the Jewish New Covenant (see the commentary on Jeremiah Eo – The Days are Coming, declares the LORD, When I Will Make a New Covenant with the People of Isra’el) to the Jewish people in a Jewish way, He made the maximum use of the Jewish festivals to convey new truths in ways that emphasize their connection with old truths.³⁴ So, Yerushalayim would be especially crowded, considerably more than the residents of the City. This was God-ordained because it would help tremendously with the growth of the Messianic Community. On that day, they were all together in one place, in the upper room (2:1). 

Ezeki’el 1:1-28 is the traditional reading from the prophets for Shavu’ot. This passage dramatically describes Ezeki’el’s vision of the Sh’khinah glory of God. Ezeki’el describes the tremendous manifestation in these terms: I looked, and behold, a storm wind came from the north, a great cloud with flashing fire and brightness all around it, and something like a glowing alloy of the fire (Ezeki’el 1:4). Imagine thousands of Jewish worshipers leaving the Temple after the morning service (at the third hour) having just heard the passage from Ezeki’el 1. Suddenly some of the same manifestations of the Ruach Ha’Kodesh started to appear before their eyes! No wonder they were amazed and perplexed by the windstorm and fire. It certainly got their attention!³⁵

Then suddenly there would be a sound to hear, a sight to see, and a miracle to experience. Then there came from heaven a sound (Greek: echos, or noise) like a mighty rushing wind. This sound wasn’t a wind, it was the sound like a mighty wind. They never felt a blast because there was never any real wind. In the Bible, wind is one of the symbols of the Ruach Ha’Kodesh. And it filled the whole house where they were sitting (2:2). ADONAI emphasized the connection between the Torah and the Ruach Ha’Kodesh by giving both similar miraculous signs. The roar and the fire in Jerusalem recalled the fire, smoke and sounds at Mt Sinai (Exodus 19:18-19; Deuteronomy 5:19-21). However, instead of God’s people being kept away (Exodus 19:21-23; Deuteronomy 5:22-24), God’s glory, represented by the tongues of fire, came to each individual.³⁶

They must have wondered if YHVH was revealing His Sh’khinah glory for the first time in nearly 600 years! The Sh’khinah glory was present at the giving of the Torah; the same glory was seen at the giving of the Ruach Ha’Kodesh. The prophet later wrote: I will put My Ruach within you . . . and cause you to walk in My decrees, so you will keep My rulings (Ezeki’el 36:27).

And then they saw tongues like fire spreading (Greek: diamerizomenai, meaning to divide and distribute) out appearing to them. Once again, this wasn’t fire, but it was like fire spreading, it looked like fire. It was flame-like in appearance and brightness, however there was no burning. What they were seeing was the Sh’khinah glory, the visible expression of God. And the result was that each tongue that looked like fire settled on each one of them (2:3).

The miracle they experienced was that they were all filled with the Ruach Ha’Kodesh and began to speak in other tongues as the Ruach enabled them to speak out (2:4). The tongues looked like fire, but then they were speaking in tongues (known languages). Those Jewish pilgrims, who had come from all over the dispersion, were hearing the impossible. Those Galilean disciples were speaking various known languages.

Nowhere does the Bible teach that the gift of tongues is anything other than human languages (Greek: dialekto, meaning dialects). Nor is there any suggestion that the true tongues described in First Corinthians 12-14 were essentially any different from the miraculous languages described in Acts 2 at Shavu’ot. The Greek word in both places is glossa. In Acts it is clear that the disciples were speaking in known languages. Luke even goes on to name some fifteen different countries and areas whose languages were being spoken (2:8-11). Unbelieving Jews at Shavu’ot heard God’s message proclaimed in their own local dialects. Such a description could not apply to ecstatic speech.

This description is the charismatic touchstone, containing what many Pentecostals and charismatics view as the core truth of the New Covenant. They believe this verse teaches that at conversion believers receive the Ruach ha-Kodesh only in a limited sense. The notion that one gets salvation at one point and baptism of the Spirit later is often referred to as the doctrine of subsequence. Therefore, charismatics wrongly argue that believers need to seek Spirit baptism in order to move to a higher level of spiritual life, being supernaturally immersed in the power of God’s Spirit. They say this is accompanied by speaking in tongues and results in new spiritual motivation and power. The epistles, however, say nothing that can be construed to support this idea. And even the book of Acts fails to support charismatic claims. Only four passages mention tongues or receiving the Ruach Ha’Kodesh: Chapters 2, 8, 10 and 19. Only in Acts 2 and 8 do believers receive the Spirit after salvation. In Acts 10 and 19, believers were baptized in the Spirit at the moment of faith. The point is clear. To say that the book of Acts presents the normal pattern for receiving the Ruach Ha’Kodesh presents a problem: no consistent pattern is evident in the book of Acts!³⁷

What caused them to speak in other languages was the filling of the Ruach Ha’Kodesh. This fulfilled the promised Yeshua made: I will send you . . . the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father (John 15:26 and 16:7-15). The Spirit enabled the twelve apostles in the upper room to speak other languages, but it was the apostles who were doing the speaking. If the Ruach was doing the speaking, then tongues could never be misused; however, it is obvious from the book of First Corinthians that speaking in tongues was a problem that needed to be addressed by Rabbi Sha’ul (see An – Peter Speaks to the Shavu’ot Crowd for the purpose of speaking in known languages).

Being filled with the Ruach must be distinguished from being immersed with (Greek: ev, meaning in, by, or with) the Ruach. Paul carefully defines the immersion in/by/with the Ruach as that act of YHVH by which He places believers into His Body. In contrast to much errant teaching today, the New Covenant nowhere commands believers to seek the immersion of the Spirit. It is a sovereign, single, unrepeatable act of the part of ADONAI, and is no more of an “experience” than are its companion doctrines of justification and adoption (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Bw – What God Does For Us at the Moment of Faith). Although some wrongly view the immersion in/by/with the Spirit as the initiation into the ranks of the spiritual elite, nothing could be further from the truth. The purpose of the immersion in/by/with the Ruach is not to divide the body of Messiah, but to unify it! As Paul wrote to the Corinthians, through one immersion in/by/with the Ruach we were all immersed into one body (First Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:26-27; Ephesians 4:4-6).

Unlike the immersion in/by/with the Ruach, being filled with the Spirit is an experience should be continuous. Although filled initially on Shavu’ot, Peter was filled again in 4:8. Many of the same people filled with the Spirit in Chapter 2 were filled again in 4:31. Acts 6:5 describes Stephen as a man full of faith and the Ruach Ha’Kodesh; however, Acts 7:55 records him being filled again. Paul was filled with the Spirit in 9:17 and again in 13:9.³⁸

The filling of the Spirit referred to in Ephesians 5:18. We should be so completely yielded to the Ruach Ha’Kodesh that He can possess us fully and, in that sense, fill us. Romans 8:9 and Ephesians 1:13-14 states that He dwells within every believer, nevertheless, He can be grieved (Ephesians 4:30), and His activity within us can be quenched (First Thessalonians 5:19). When we allow this to happen, we do not experience the fullness of the Spirit’s working and His power in and through us. To be filled with the Ruach implies freedom for Him to occupy every part of our lives, guiding and controlling us. Then His power can be exerted through us so that what we do is fruitful to God. The filling of the Spirit does not apply to outward acts alone; it also applies to the innermost thoughts and motives of our actions. Psalm 19:14 says, May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable before You, ADONAI, my Rock and my Redeemer.

Sin is what hinders the filling of the Holy Spirit, and obedience to God is how the filling of the Spirit is maintained. Ephesians 5:18 commands that we be filled with the Ruach; however, it is not praying for the filling of the Ruach Ha’Kodesh that accomplishes the filling. Only our obedience to God’s commands allows the Spirit freedom to work within us. Because we are still infected with sin, it is impossible to be filled with the Ruach all of the time. When we sin, we should immediately confess it to God and renew our commitment to being Spirit-filled and Spirit-led.³⁹ In the final analysis, we are leaky vessels and need to be filled continually.

This was the birthday, or the beginning of the Messianic Community, and it opened the door to salvation to both Jews and proselytes (who were Gentile converts to Judaism) called God-fearers (Acts 13:16. 26, 17:17). In Acts 2:10 it tells us that there were converts to Judaism present in Tziyon on Shavu’ot. By the end of Acts the gospel will be accepted by the Gentiles and the Church will be made up of both Jewish and Gentile believers (Ephesians 2:14-15). However, there is a widespread malicious Christian teaching today that the Church is the “New” or “Spiritual” Isra’el, having replaced the Jews as God’s people. In this view – known variously as Replacement theology, Covenant theology, Kingdom Now theology, Dominionism, Reconstructionism, or the Hebrew Roots movement (see Ag – Replacement Theology and Acts) – God promises to Isra’el were nullified when “the Jews” refused to accept Jesus (never mind that all the first believers were Jews). This false theology, impugning the character of ADONAI by suggesting that He will not honor His Word, has provided apparent justification for many anti-Semitic acts in the Church. It also lies behind most Christian protestations that the present-day regathering of the Jewish people to the Land of Isra’el is without theological or biblical significance.⁴⁰

Now Jewish people and proselytes were staying in Jerusalem, the righteous of the TaNaKh from every nation under heaven. Now Shavu’ot was fifty days after the Festival of Pesach/Unleavened Bread, (and it took a long time to travel in those days), so if you lived a long distance from Jerusalem instead of going home and coming back again for Shavu’ot you would just stay in Tziyon. So, these Jews had stayed in Yerushalayim since the Passover in which Jesus was crucified. And when the crowd heard this sound (Greek: phones, meaning languages ) of their native languages, and as a result they gathered in the Temple compound. They were bewildered, because each was hearing them speaking in his own language (Greek: dialekto, meaning dialect). The sight of the supposedly ignorant Galileans speaking so many languages cause the astonished crowd to exclaim: All these who are speaking – aren’t they Galileans. The accent of the Galileans was very pronounced and you could easily detect a Galilean by his or her accent (Matthew 26:73; Mark 14:70; Luke 22:58)? How is it, then, that we each hear our own birth language (2:5-8)? That this supernatural communication was known human languages, not ecstatic speech, becomes clear as the list of specific tongues is listed.

The first four are all east of Judea: The Parthians and Medes and Elamites and those living in Mesopotamia. These were people from the ten tribes and their major language was Aramaic. He next mentions Judea, but because these are Judeans who are foreigners it probably involves the province that Judea was in, which would include Syria. The next five he mentions: Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia are all in Asia Minor in present day Turkey and they spoke Greek. The next two, Egypt and parts of Libya toward Cyrene are from North Africa and they spoke Greek. And visitors from Rome who spoke Latin. Then Luke mentions Greek-speaking Cretans and Arabs who spoke Nabatean – we (both Jewish people and proselytes) hear them declaring in our own tongues [languages] the mighty deeds of God! And they were all amazed and perplexed, and questioned each other, saying: What does this mean (2:9-12)? What had been prophesied by Isaiah (see the commentary on Isaiah Fm – With Foreign Lips of Strange Tones God Will Speak to This People) was fulfilled when the Spirit of God came at Shavu’ot. The early fruits had come in and the implicit promise was that the latter harvest would also come in.⁴¹

The event recorded here in Acts 2 was unique. You only have one birth and this was it for the Church. God wanted everyone to know something unusual was happening, and that is why there was a sound like a mighty wind. That is why there were tongues like fire sitting on each of the apostles.

And that is why they spoke in other (known) languages. That particular Shavu’ot was as unique as the creation of the world or man; as once-for-all-time as the incarnation, death, resurrection and ascension of Messiah. Yet charismatics would make this once-for-all-time event normative for believers for all-time. They claim that what happened in this chapter of Acts should happen to everyone. If that were so, then everyone should also experience a mighty rushing wind and tongues of fire on their heads! But of course, those phenomena are rarely mentioned (if ever) today.⁴²

Others, however, poking fun, were saying, “They are full of sweet new wine” (2:13)! Like members of the Sanhedrin who heard Yeshua’s claims and saw His confirming miracles, but concluded that He was demon possessed (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Ek – It is only by Beelzebub, the Prince of Demons, That This Fellow Drives Out Demons), these scoffers rejected the evidence that this was a work of God. Instead, they proposed the ridiculous hypothesis that the apostles were drunk. Tragically, their skepticism was to harden into full-fledged opposition toward the gospel and the apostles. However, no amount of opposition could stop the work of ADONAI that began at Shavu’ot.⁴³

The body of Christ has, for the most part, not taken Jesus’ command to communicate the gospel first to the Jew and then to the Gentile very seriously (Romans 1:16). In the sense the gospel has already reached the ends of the earth – the Bible, or at least parts of it, has been translated into some 2,000 languages. Yet this does not excuse what has been, by and large, the Church’s failure to reach the Jewish people with the gospel. Instead of developing a mistaken theology to excuse their neglect (John 14:6), or becoming exasperated when Jews reject their message, the Church should communicate God’s love and truth while seeking His wisdom on how to address issues Jewish people raise in connection with Yeshua, the B’rit Chadashah, and religion in general.

The book of Ruth reminds us of a lesson not to be ignored. Ruth the Moabites was added to the Jewish people with her noble confession: Your people will be my people and your God my God (Ruth 1:16). This woman, who became an ancestor of Yeshua (Matthew 1:5), expressed her loyalty to the Jewish people even before she spoke of God. But over the centuries, many calling themselves Christians have done just the opposite – hating the Jews, accusing them of killing Jesus, ignoring the New Covenant’s warning: Do not consider yourself to be superior to those other [Jewish] branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the [Jewish] root, but the root supports you (Romans 11:16-26). Acts 2:1-4 shows that the Gentiles could not have become part of God’s people without becoming proselytes. And today Gentiles can become Christians if they cannot say to the Jews: Your people will be my people, and at the same time saying: Your God will be my God.⁴⁴

Matthias Chosen to Replace Judas
1: 12-26

30 AD

About this time, Yeshua was crucified under Pontius Pilate. In addition, the resurrection appearances, Shavu’ot, the initial growth of the Messianic community in and around Yerushalayim are in view.

Matthias chosen to replace Judas DIG: Who is present in this meeting? From Mark 3:20-21, 31-35, and John 7:1-5, how do you account for this change in Yeshua’s “family?” In light of Peter’s denial of Jesus, how might the others feel about his leadership? How might events of John 21:15-19 calm any fears that they might have had? Given the scene in verses 6-8 how would you be praying if you were in this group? What emotions would you express? What is the role of Scripture, prayer, discussion, qualifications and trust in ADONAI regarding the process for choosing a replacement for Judas?

REFLECT: What have been your best experiences in group prayer? How does faith in Messiah affect your prayer life? How might joining in prayer with others around a common mission (one that is beyond your natural ability) enhance your own prayer life? How does verse 8 provide that for you? How does the pattern of decision-making here compare with how you make important decisions? Which of the ingredients listed here do you utilize more? What is the correlation between faith and your knowledge of God’s will? What can you do this week to strengthen your faith in the resurrected Christ?

As the book of Acts opened, Jesus equipped the apostles with the necessary spiritual gifts to launch the completion of His unfinished work of gathering a body of believers, the bride of the Lamb (Revelation 18:23, 19:7, 21:2 and 9, 22:17), into the Kingdom of God. It was vitally important that the right men were anointed for that mission. Accordingly, a replacement had to be chosen for the dead traitor Judas (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Lm – Judas Hangs Himself).

They believed in each other: Then they returned to Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives, which is near Jerusalem, a Shabbat day’s journey, which describes a short distance, the only kind allowed on the Sabbath (1:12). This was an act of obedience because Jesus had commanded them: Not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father promised . . . there you will receive power when the Ruach ha-Kodesh has come upon you (2:4-5). They returned even though Tziyon was not a safe place for them.

The rabbis taught that a Shabbat day’s journey was about 0.57 of a mile. How did they come up with that distance? They used three passages of scripture from the Torah. The first one is Exodus 16:29: See, Adonai has given you the Shabbat . . . let every man stay in his place, and let no man go out on the seventh day. The second scripture they used was Exodus 31:13: Surely you must keep My Shabbatot, for it is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, so you may know that I am Adonai who sanctifies you. But neither one of those two passages say anything about distance. So thirdly, they went to Numbers 35:5, which doesn’t deal with the Shabbat as such, it deals with a city of refuge. If you killed a man accidently, to avoid being killed yourself by the avenger of the blood, you could flee to a city of refuge. From then on, however, until the death of the high priest, you were to stay in the city of refuge. You could venture outside the city limits for only 2,000 cubits (Numbers 35:5), which is about three-quarters of a mile. So what the rabbis did was interpret the two Exodus passages that deal with the Sabbath by the Numbers passage that tells you the distance that someone who killed a person accidently could go outside a city of refuge, and came up with 0.57 of a mile.²²

When they had entered, they went up to the upper room where they were staying. The upper room has the definite article in front of it, so it is a specific upper room. Since no upper room is mentioned in the immediate context, we must refer to a previously mentioned upper room. And the only previously mentioned upper room was that of the last Passover (Mark 14:15; Luke 22:12). It is also the upper room where one of the post-resurrection appearances of Yeshua took place (John 20:19 and 26). And it is a real possibility that it was where the Messianic community started in Acts 2:1. The rabbis teach that it was the home of the mother of John Mark, the author of the gospel of Mark.

Then Luke lists the eleven apostles that were involved. Peter and John and Jacob and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; Jacob son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judah son of Jacob (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Cy – These are the Names of the Twelve Apostles).  Luke wishes to chronicle the successful growth of the Church from Jerusalem to Rome, and the Twelve, apart from Peter in particular, seem to have played a limited role in this process. In other words, Luke wishes to show how it developed away from being a purely Messianic community to being a worldwide movement, with a growing majority of Gentiles as believers in Luke’s time. To put it a little differently, the Twelve’s mission field was to Jews, and particularly Jews who lived in Judea, Samaria, and Galilee. As such, this is the last time they are mentioned in Acts (1:13).²³

They believed in prayer: Prayer played a significant role in the story of the Messianic Community as recorded in Acts. All these with one mind (2:1 and 46, 4:24, 5:12, 15:25) were continuing together in prayer for the promise of the Father (1:14a). They were united together in prayer. The Greek word for with one mind (Greek: homothumadon, refers to an inner unity, or being of the same passion). The word is used in the Septuagint in Exodus 19:8, where the people of Isra’el answered together [homothumadon], “All that Adonai has said we will do.” So, the eleven apostles were there along with the women, who may have included the wives of the apostles and certainly the women who accompanied Yeshua from Galilee and witnessed the crucifixion (Luke 8:2, 23:55, 24:10).

Judaism always granted an important place to women; however, in the synagogue men and women were traditionally separated by a dividing wall or curtain (m’chitzah) so that nothing could be a distraction with prayer. Although in a powerful prayer meeting such concerns are gone, as all turn to YHVH. Moreover, this group functioned more like a family than a congregational assembly.²⁴

Much legend, myth, and faulty dogma have arisen over the centuries in connection with Miriam, Yeshua’s mother (1:14b). In contrast to the inordinate devotion the Roman Catholic Church gives her, she is mentioned here for the last time. At this point she walks off the pages of the Bible never to be heard of again.

Miriam was a woman of extraordinary virtue, or she would never have been chosen to be the mother of the Lord Jesus Christ. For that role she deserves respect and honor (Luke 1:42). Still, she was a sinner who praised ADONAI as her Savior. She referred to herself as a humble bond slave to God, who needed mercy (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Au – Jesus Presented in the Temple). To offer prayers to her and elevate her to a role as co-redemptrix with Christ is to go beyond the bounds of Scripture and her own confession. The silence of the epistles, which form the doctrinal core of the New Covenant, is especially significant. If she played the important role in salvation as assigned to her by the Roman Catholic Church, or if she were to receive prayers as an intercessor between believers and Messiah, surely the B’rit Chadashah would have spelled that out. Nor do such Roman Catholic teachings as her virgin birth and bodily assumption into heaven find any biblical support. They are fabrications.²⁵

And His four half-brothers (1:14c and Matthew 13:55). During the ministry of Jesus they were unbelievers (Matthew 12:46-50; Mark 3:31-35; John 7:3-5). But they became believers as a result of the resurrection of their half-brother. In fact, one of the resurrection appearances of Jesus was to His half-brother James (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Mp – Then Jesus Appeared to James). They became active in ministry, in fact, two of the four wrote books in the B’rit Chadashah, James and Jude.

However, there was one apostolic spot that had been vacated by Judas. Therefore, in those days, Peter stood up among the brothers and sisters. Although Peter took the lead and made this proposal; nevertheless, he did not make the final decision because he did not have the sole authority of appointment. The number of names all together was about a hundred and twenty (1:15). That number is significant. The rabbis taught that a hundred and twenty was the minimum requirement for constituting a local Sanhedrin. In spite of all Yeshua’s miracles – raising the dead, healing the sick, giving sight to the blind, and His authority over demons – Isra’el rejected and crucified Him. And at the time of His death, it seems He had about a hundred and twenty dedicated followers.

Peter acted as the spokesman for the community, as he did in the majority of cases in the early chapters of Acts. He was not offering his own opinion, but was being led by the Spirit of God. He began by noting that Judas didn’t spoil God’s plan, he fulfilled it:  Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Ruach ha-Kodesh foretold (the divine author) by the mouth of David (the human author), concerning Judas – who became a guide to those who seized Yeshua.  For he was counted among us (one of the Twelve) and received his share of this office (1:16-17). 

Now this man Judas bought a field with the reward of his wickedness (1:18a). This seems to contradict Matthew 27:3-10, where it says the priests were the ones who purchased the field. Under Jewish law money that was improperly obtained could not be used in the Temple treasury. However, Judas, filled with remorse, threw it into the Temple compound and left. Matthew points out that the priests felt that this was money wrongfully gained, and therefore could not be used for the Temple treasury. In such cases, Jewish law said the money had to be returned to the donor. However, the law also made a provision if the donor died before the money was returned, which was the case of Judas. In those cases, the money still could not be used for the Temple treasury, to purchase something for the common good. So the priests bought a field to bury poor people in. And since the field was bought with blood money, it became known as the Field of Blood. But Jewish law also said the thing purchased had to be in the name of the donor even though he was dead. So legally, Judas bought the field although he was not involved in the transaction whatsoever.

When Judas hung himself in the Valley of ben Hinnom, it was the first day of the Passover and according to Jewish law if there was a dead body hanging in Tziyon, the whole city was considered defiled and the morning offering could not be celebrated. But since the body hung outside of Tziyon, the city was considered cleansed and the celebration of the Passover could begin. They could return later and recover the body for burial.

Consequently, the betrayer’s body hung there until the sun set on Passover. However, the festivals of Unleavened Bread and Pesach together lasted for seven days (Exodus 12:19). No one would dare touch his body during that time for fear of defilement. Heaven only knows how long he hung there that week, but ultimately the weight of his body broke whatever branch he hung on and he fell headlong down the steep cliffs onto the jagged rocks of the Valley of Hinnom below. His body burst open and all his intestines spilled out (Acts 1:18b). Death, however, did not relieve his guilt. It only made it permanent. As the Savior of Sinners repeatedly declared, hell is a place of eternal torment, of weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 8:12, 13:42 and 50, 22:13, 24:51, 25:30).

So Peter points out that what happened to Judas and the betrayal was a fulfillment of Scripture. And that field became known to all those living in Jerusalem, so in their own language that field was called Akeldama – that is Aramaic for the ‘Field of Blood’ (1:19). People spoke both Aramaic and Hebrew so the B’rit Chadashah quotes words form both languages. For it is written in the Book of Psalms,
‘Let his dwelling place become desolate,
and let there be no one living in it’ (Psalm 69:25 LXX),
and ‘Let another take his position’ (Psalm 109:8 LXX) (1:20).
Luke quotes the TaNaKh almost always in a form either corresponding to the LXX or close to it, and not according to the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Here Psalms 69:25 and 109:8 are quoted close but not exactly corresponding to the LXX.²⁶

It was necessary that twelve men witness at Shavu’ot to the twelve tribes of Isra’el, and also that twelve men be prepared to sit on twelve thrones to judge the twelve tribes (Luke 22:28-30). From Acts Chapters 2-7, the witness was primarily to Isra’el, to the Jew first (Romans 1:16, Acts 3:26, 13:46). Once the message had gone out to the Gentiles in Acts Chapters 10-11, this Jewish emphasis began to decline. When the apostle James (Yeshua’s brother) was martyred (Acts 12:1-2), he was not replaced. Why? Because the initial witness to Isra’el had been completed, and the message was going out to both Jews and Gentiles alike. There was no more need for the twelve apostles to give witness to the twelve tribes of Isra’el exclusively.²⁷

They believed in the Lord’s leading: Peter continued, the one to replace Judas must come from the hundred and twenty that were with them in the upper room, and to be a witness of Christ’s whole earthly ministry to be among the Twelve. Therefore, one of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord (Greek: kurios, meaning Lord or Master) Yeshua went in and out among us – beginning with His immersion by John until the day He was taken up from us – must become a witness with us of His resurrection (1:21-22). In the book of Acts there are two apostolic groups. The first is the apostolic group of the Twelve who were with Jesus from His immersion by John to His ascension. That’s why Sha’ul did not qualify to be one of this group. The second group of apostles had to see the resurrected Christ. In the book of Acts, three such men are mentioned: James, the half-brother of Jesus (see above), Barnabus (who was one of the five hundred of First Cor 15:6), and Sha’ul, who saw Yeshua on the Damascus road (9:1-6).

The main ministry of the new apostle was simply to become a witness with us of His resurrection. We can have the same ministry by showing that Yeshua lives in us.

So, they nominated two. Only two out of the hundred and twenty fulfilled the necessary requirements of having been with Jesus and having witnessed His resurrection: Joseph, called Barsabbas, a Hellenized rendering of the Jewish name Bar-Shabbat, meaning son of the Sabbath (however he is also sometimes called by his Roman name Justus), and Matthias meaning gift of God. And they prayed for God to reveal the choice He had already made, and said, “You, O Lord, who knows the hearts (Greek: kardiognosta, meaning the heart searcher) of all men, show us which of these two You have chosen to take the position in this office as apostle, from which Judah turned aside to go to his own place, to sh’ol” (1:23-25).

Their doing what Jesus would do was notable. How did the Lord choose His twelve apostles? And it was during these days that Yeshua went out to the mountain to pray, and He spent all night in prayer to God. When day came, He called His disciples, choosing from among them twelve whom He also named apostles (Luke 6:12-13). He prayed, even as these hundred and twenty did, to see who the Lord would add to their number.

Then they cast lots for them. This was a divinely approved practice in the TaNaKh: The lot is cast into the lap, but their very decision is from ADONAI (Proverbs 16:33) to discern the will of ADONAI (Leviticus 16:8; Joshua 14:2; Numbers 10:34 and 11:1). The way it was done was that they would take two stones, one with the name of Joseph on it and another with the name of Matthias on it. The stones were then put into some kind of a container, and it was shaken until one stone come out. And the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles (1:26). There are only twelve apostles. This is the last time in the biblical record that this method is used because of the coming of the Ruach Ha’Kodesh in Chapter 2, this method was no longer necessary. And he was added to the eleven apostles (1:23-26). There is no indication anywhere in the book of Acts that this was the wrong way of doing it. In fact, in 6:2 we read: So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together; therefore, Matthis was then counted among them. Also, in Matthew 19:28, Jesus said that the apostles will sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Isra’el, and Matthias would fulfill that roll. Then we are told that the New Jerusalem will have twelve foundations, and on them will be the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. Matthias’ name will be on one of those twelve foundations (Revelation 21:14).²⁸ With Matthias’ selection to replace the traitor Judas, all was now ready for the birth of the Messianic community on the festival of Shavu’ot and to turn the world upside down.

The stage was then set for Shavu’ot. The apostles had received Messiah’s Great Commission and seen His ascension. The team of apostles was complete again, ready to be His chosen witnesses. Only one thing was missing: The Spirit of God had not yet come. Though the place left vacant had been replaced by Judas had been filled by Matthias, the place left vacant by Yeshua had not been filled by the Ruach. So, we leave Luke’s first chapter of Acts with the one-hundred-and-twenty waiting in Yerushalayim, persevering in prayer with one heart and mind, poised ready to fulfill Christ’s command just as soon as He fulfilled His promise.²⁹

A closer look at kurios: The Greek word kurios, meaning Lord or Master, is the most frequently used title for Messiah in all of Luke-Acts, used almost twice as frequently as the term Christ. The emphasis in Luke-Acts matches Luke’s basic stress on ADONAI’s sovereignty and His plan of salvation, which is fulfilled through the life and death of Yeshua. He is the one who expresses and executes this plan of salvation. It becomes clear that the basic connotation for Luke of the term kurios is of One who exercises dominion over the world, and in particular over human lives and events.

Acts indicates that for some of the early believers it was hard to acknowledge that Yeshua was the risen Lord (10:40-42, 11:16, 16:31, 20:21). It is Jesus, the risen and exalted Lord whom people are called upon to turn to and believe in (5:14, 9:35, 11:17). It was this risen Lord who confronts Sha’ul on the Damascus road (9:10-17, 18:9), and to whom believers must remain faithful (20:19). It is the Lord Jesus whom the original apostles traveled with (Acts 1:21), whose teaching Paul can quote (20:35), and who commissions people for ministry (20:24). In these texts, the name Yeshua seems to be added on to kurios to make clear the identity of this Lord. The continuation of the Lord’s identity before and after His resurrection makes it possible for Luke to refer to Jesus’ earthly activity and teaching using the term kurios, even though he knows that Messiah does not fully or truly assume the roles of exalted Lord until after He had risen from the dead.³⁰

When Will Yeshua Restore the Kingdom?
1: 1-11

30 AD
About this time, Yeshua was crucified under Pontius Pilate. In addition, the resurrection appearances, Shavu’ot, the initial growth of the Messianic community in and around Yerushalayim are in view.

When will Yeshua restore the Kingdom DIG: How does this book pick up where Luke 24:45-53 leaves off (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Mr – The Ascension of Jesus)? What do the disciples think will happen when they receive the Ruach ha-Kodesh (1:6)? What are some major ways their idea of the Kingdom differs from Yeshua (1:7-8)? As a disciple, what is the impact on you of Messiah’s words (1:8)? Of Jesus’ departure (1:9)? Of the promise of the two angels in (1:11)? And of the Lords’ related promise (John 16:5-15)?

REFLECT: What proofs do you have of Yeshua’s resurrection that would make sense to your non-believing friends? What is your “Jerusalem” to which you are called to bear witness? How do you sense a need for the Ruach ha-Kodesh to help you? What is the relationship between Christ’s resurrection and your responsibility of being a witness?

The prologue: Luke had to build a bridge between the book of Acts and the gospel of Luke. I wrote the first volume (the gospel of Luke), Theophilus, about all that Yeshua began to do and teach – up to the day He was taken up (see the commentary on The Life of Christ, to see link click Mr – The Ascension of Jesus), after He had given orders by the Ruach ha-Kodesh to the eleven apostles He had chosen (1:1-2). Dedication was a widely-recognized literary courtesy in the ancient world whereby an author acknowledged the dedicatee’s influence on his decision to write and/or “personalized” his work as a gift or communication to a particular individual (patron/ess). While dedications were not common in either Greek or Roman literature, they appear to be quite common in both technical prose and helenistic Jewish literature.⁹

Luke’s purpose is the same as it was in his gospel, that is, to convey accurate information. In the gospel of Luke, he stated that he wanted to produce an orderly account (Greek: anatassomai, meaning to arrange in order). So we can expect the same thing to be true in the book of Acts. In the gospel of Luke, Theophilus (meaning friend of God) is referred to as most excellent. This means that Theophilus was a Roman official, in fact, in the book of Acts the phrase most excellent is used of Felix in 23:26 and 24:3, and of noble Festus in 26:25. In all probability, Theophilus was Luke’s benefactor for the publication of his work. Without printing presses at that time, everything had to be written out by scribes and that cost money. Therefore, wealthy men would finance the publication of a work. So it seems that Theophilus became a believer, and being wealthy, he chose to finance both the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. It is interesting that Luke says: All that Yeshua began to do. Indicating that the book of Acts was still the book of Jesus. The book of Luke was what He began to do, and the book of Acts is what He continued to do. In Luke, Jesus acted on His own behalf, whereas in the book of Acts, He acted through His apostles.¹⁰